Below are the citations and abstracts for the presentations I have given at conferences as an associate professor.

Sutherlin, A.L. Effect of student response systems on student achievement and study time in Science Classrooms. Biennial Conference on Chemical Education, State College, PA, (2012).

Abstract: In four studies on the use of student response systems (clickers), we sought to understand if the use of clickers would impact students’ attitudes toward the use of technology for instruction and achievement on exams in university chemistry and biology classes.  The study designs were quasi-experimental using switching treatments.   Pre- and post- attitudinal surveys were administered to all students.  Self-reported study time and exam scores were analyzed.  While in three of the four studies students reported that they enjoyed using clickers, the results revealed no significant changes in attitude toward the use of instructional technology. Furthermore, neither the use of clickers nor the amount of student reported study time served as useful predictor of achievement in science classes.

Sutherlin, A.L. I gave my students more work and they thanked me: Using Technology to Implement Constructivist Techniques. Biennial Conference on Chemical Education, State College, PA, (2012).

Abstract: In a first semester biochemistry course, students did assigned reading followed by just-in-time teaching warm-up questions, which they responded to online before class.  Class consisted of mini-lectures based on answers to the warm-up questions interspersed with clicker questions, followed by peer instruction. In peer instruction, if 30-70% of the students got the correct answer on the clicker question, students worked in small groups to come to a consensus.  This protocol allowed me to find areas of content where students were struggling and to focus on areas that require higher order thinking skills. The performance on exams of this year’s class was compared to the previous year’s class.  On two of the four exams the treatment group performed statistically significantly better on exams. Pre- and post-attitudinal studies along with course evaluations showed that the students appreciated the use of the warm-up and peer instruction questions.

Sutherlin, A.L. Blended Biochemistry: Using technology outside of class to better reach students in class. American Chemical Society National Conference. Philadelphia, PA (2012).

Abstract: Biochemistry is difficult because it requires not only the memorization, but also the interpretation and evaluation of large amounts of material. Technology allowed me to modify a Biochemistry I course to use constructivist techniques. Students did assigned reading followed by Just-in-Time Teaching Warm-up questions which they responded to online before class.  The Warm-up questions along with responses to clicker questions followed by Peer Instruction were used to guide class discussion.  This allowed me to find the areas of content where the students were struggling and to focus in on areas that require higher order thinking skills. The performance on exams of this year’s class was compared to the previous year’s class.  On two of the four exams the treatment group performed statistically significantly better on exams. Pre- and post-attitudinal studies along with course evaluations showed that the students appreciated the use of the Warm-up and Peer Instruction questions.

Sutherlin, A.L. Give Students More Work and They’ll Thank You: Using technology to implement constructivist techniques. Educause Learning Initiative Annual Meeting. Austin, TX (2012).

Abstract: Biochemistry is difficult because it requires the memorization and evaluation of large amounts of material. Technology allowed me to modify my course to use constructivist techniques. Students did assigned reading followed by Just-in-Time Teaching Warm-up questions which they responded to online before class.  The Warm-up questions along with responses to clicker questions followed by Peer Instruction were used to guide class discussion.  This allowed me to find the points at which the students were struggling and focus in on areas that require higher order thinking skills. The performance of this year’s class to previous years’ groups was compared on exams.

Sutherlin, A.L.  G.R. Sutherlin, U. Akpanudo.  The Effect of Clickers in University Science Courses. Mid-South Educational Research Association Annual Meeting.  Oxford, MS (2011).

Abstract: This paper reports on four studies that were a continuation of two previous studies.  The first study studied the effect of adding clickers to instruction.  The second study considered changing the teaching methodology.  No significant difference was found in achievement in either study but in an attitude survey the students reported feeling the clickers help them learn the material.  The studies in this report collected data on the amount of time the students studied for each exam and the students’ attitude toward the use of clickers for instruction as well as their exam scores.  Each of the current studies was a little different.  The first one followed the design of the previous two studies being conducted in a university biochemistry class. The second one had only one section introductory chemistry class, so only the survey data was collected. The third was conducted in a university biology class with a different professor and the fourth is an organic chemistry class at a different university with a different professor.  All  studies found that the students thought the clickers were helpful in learning the material.  No significant difference was found in either the amount of self-reported study time or the exam scores between the group that used clickers and the group that did not.

Sutherlin, A.L.  Trying to Find the Effect of Clickers.  Educause Learning Initiative 2011 Online Spring Focus Session “Seeking the Evidence of Impact.” (2011).

Abstract: In five studies, use of student handheld response systems in science classrooms has been studied to elucidate their effect on student learning.  All studies were conducted in two sections of university level courses where one section served as a control and the other was treated.  The study design was quasi-experimental using switching treatments with replication.   Student pre- and post- attitudinal surveys were administered to all students.  The students’ university GPA and ACT scores were examined to determine the equivalency of the groups. The quiz and exam scores were analyzed to determine if there was a significant difference in achievement.

Sutherlin, A.L. Effect of student response systems on student achievement and study time.  ConnectEd Summit. Abilene, TX (2011).

Abstract: In five studies, use of student handheld response systems (clickers) in chemistry and biology classrooms has been studied to elucidate their effect on student learning.  Three studies used Qwizdom Q4 clickers, while two employed Turning Point ResponseWare for the iPhone/ iPod Touch.  All studies were conducted in two sections of university level science courses where one section served as a control and the other was treated.  The first three studies were in introductory level chemistry, the fourth in organic chemistry, and the fifth in general biology.  In all five, the study design was quasi-experimental using switching treatments with replication.   Student pre- and post- attitudinal surveys were administered to all students in both sections.  The students’ university grade point average and ACT scores were examined to determine the equivalency of the groups. The quiz and exam scores were analyzed to determine if there was a significant difference in achievement.

The first study examined the effect of students using clickers during instruction when the teaching method was consistent between the sections.  The second study looked at the effect of changing teaching methodology when the clickers were used.  The third study focused on the effect of clickers on students self-reported study time and the significance of assigning value to in-class clicker questions.  In the first three studies, there was no statistically significant difference in the achievement between the control and experimental groups on exams.  Over the course of all three studies there was a slight but statistically significant difference in quizzes with the control group averaging slightly higher.  In all studies, students self-reported that the clickers helped them learn the class material.  The current studies are repeating the third study in a general biology course and organic chemistry course to attempt to assess the difference in courses and instructors.

Sutherlin, A. L. and G.R. Sutherlin. Effect of student response systems on student achievement and study time. Biennial Conference on Chemical Education. Denton, Texas (2010).

Abstract: In three studies, use of student handheld response systems (clickers) in chemistry classrooms has been studied to elucidate their effect on student learning.  The first two studies used Qwizdom Q4 clickers, while the third employed Turning Point ResponseWare for the iPhone/ iPod Touch.  All three studies were conducted in two sections of university level introductory chemistry courses where one section served as a control and the other was treated.  In all three, the study design was quasi-experimental using switching treatments with replication.   Student pre- and post- attitudinal surveys were administered to all students in both sections.  The students’ university grade point average and ACT scores were examined to determine the equivalency of the groups. The quiz and exam scores were analyzed to determine if there was a significant difference in achievement.

The first study examined the effect of students using clickers during instruction when the teaching method was consistent between the sections.  The second study looked at the effect of changing teaching methodology when the clickers were used.  In the first two studies, there was no statistically significant difference in the achievement between the control and experimental groups on quizzes and exams.  In both studies, students self-reported that the clickers helped them learn the class material.  Currently, the third study focuses on the effect of clickers on students self-reported study time and the significance of assigning value to in-class clicker questions.

Sutherlin, A. L. Mobile Devices as Clickers. Turning Technologies Users Conference. Cambridge, MA (2010).

Abstract: One issue in employing student response systems is that students often forget to bring their clickers to class.  Students, however, nearly always have their cell phones.  Abilene Christian University has embraced this issue with their Mobile Learning Initiative by providing all students with an iPhone or iPod Touch.  TurningPoint has developed the ResponseWare app for the iPhone/ iPod Touch and Blackberry which I have employed in university-level Introduction to Organic and Biological Chemistry courses and will use this app in two additional classes this fall.  I will share my experiences with using this app, its advantages and disadvantages.

Student Presentations

The following students have presented at the ACU Research Festival. I have not taken them to external conferences because I did not believe that the biochemistry research was developed enough to present at external conferences.

Adeniyi Adebesin: 2009

Funmi Adbesin: 2009, 2010

Holly Perkins: 2010 (Outstanding Poster Presentation), 2011 (Outstanding Oral Presentation)

Jonathan Jacobs: 2011

Travis King and Bukola Adebesin: 2013

Alex Clendening: 2013

Luke Sorrell: 2013

Aubrey White: 2014

Maxwell Moore: 2014 (Outstanding Oral Presentation)