CiteScore: 4.9     h-index: 21

Document Type : Original Research Article


Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of the Incarnate Word, San Antonio, United States


The pandemic has brought both challenges and opportunities to all universities across the globe. Every challenge will open the door for new opportunities. As the world was fighting against the global pandemic, all universities were transitioned online over a short period without any prior preparation. Over time as an instructor, I shape myself for combating the situation. Utilizing Zoom, whiteboard, molecular model, videos, ChemDraw, Respondus, LockDown Browser, blackboard, mandated attendance, interactive class, and office hour, this instructor was able to facilitate the learning process compatible with the face-to-face model. Laboratory was the blend of lab manuals, lab videos, and simulation experiments. Prelab, quiz, and report were prepared based on the lab manual and lab video. Similarly, simulation experiments were conducted for each lab via Beyond Labz which helped to connect the lecture with the techniques of the laboratory.  In fall 2020, a survey was conducted on sixty students representing different organic chemistry lectures (CHEM 2311) and laboratories (CHEM 2111) at the University of the Incarnate Word, San Antonio, Texas. The outcome of the survey revealed that live synchronous with mandated attendance and office hour fulfills the expectations of the students as well as the standards of the course. This instructor’s perspective also aligned with the outcome of the students’ thoughts. The preferred response for live synchronous is almost half of the total so it is equally beneficial, provides full expectation, and almost as effective as face to face.

Graphical Abstract

A Potential Package for Organic Chemistry Remote Teaching


[1] N.K. Garg, J. Biol. Chem., 2019, 294, 17678–17683.
[2] R. Sunasee, J. Chem. Educ., 2020, 97, 3176−3181.
[3] I.P. O’Carroll, M.R. Buck, D.P. Durkin, W.S. Farrell, J. Chem. Educ., 2020, 97, 2383–2388.
[4] A. Saar, M. Mclaughlin, R. Barlow, J. Goetz, S.A. Adediran, A. Gupta, J. Chem. Educ., 2020, 97, 3223–3229.
[5], S. Marincean, S.L. Steven, J. Chem. Educ., 2020, 97, 3074–3078.
[6] N. Ali, S. Ullah, J. Chem. Educ., 2020, 97, 3563–3574.
[7] V. Kassarnig, A. Bjerre-Nielsen, E. Mones, S. Lehmann, D.D. Lassen, PLoS ONE, 2017, 12, e0187078.
[8] R.L. Stowe, B.J. Esselman, V.R. Ralph, A.J. Ellison, J.D. Martell, J. Chem. Educ., 2020, 97, 2408−2420.
[9] Y.S.L.S. Snell, Medical Teacher, 1999, 21, 37−42.
[10] S.G. Bollmeier, P.J. Wenger, A.B. Forinash, Am. J. Pharm. Educ., 2010, 74, 127.
[11] C. Barnes, B.L. Paris, An Analysis of Academic Integrity Techniques Used in Online Courses at a Southern University. Northwest Decision Sciences Institute Annual Meeting Proceedings, 2013.
[12] M. Richards-Babb, R. Curtis, Z. Georgieva, J.H. Penn, J. Chem. Educ., 2015, 92, 1813–1819.
[13] F.L. Wallace, S.R. Wallace, Comput. Educ. 2001,37, 195–209.
[14] B.F. Woodfield, Beyond Labz. (accessed Jan 8, 2021).
[15] B.F. Woodfield, H.R. Catlin, G.L. Waddoups, M.S. Moore, R. Swan, R. Allen, G. Bodily, J. Chem. Educ., 2004<