The second section of the course focused on performing the proposed student-led analyses and evaluating the data. This section of the course began with a visit from a trained art conservator, Monica Berry, who responsibly sampled the objects. The student teams and instructor had a discussion with the conservator before sampling to determine the least destructive means to acquire the most chemical information. Having a conservator who is willing to work collaboratively was essential to obtain high quality technical information.

Class meetings were organized as weekly research meetings and were reduced in frequency to once per week Each week the student groups was required to write a report of the previous weeks’ work. This served three functions: (1) holding students accountable for analyzing and thinking about their data in a timely fashion, (2) providing a forum for instructor feedback, and (3) providing an opportunity to make progress on the rough draft of their final paper. In class, each group shared their progress and presented their latest data. The benefit of this approach was that all of the class learned about each other’s projects in an open discussion format. Classmates assisted in troubleshooting problems or interpreting results. An additional benefit was that students practiced discussing their projects orally before the final presentations.

This second section of the course required intense planning as it involved scheduling instrument time, coordinating with the Collections Manager at the museum so that objects were available and measurements could be supervised and coordinating the schedules of the student teams. Analysis of whole objects was done almost exclusively at the Tang museum with portable instruments such as the XRF and infrared camera. Microsamples were acquired by the professional conservator so were analyzed in the science facility where the instrumentation was located.

Students worked in all combinations to accomplish their analyses based on their individual availability. Most often times, they worked in pairs, but sometimes, they would conduct an analysis individually or as a whole group. The weekly group meetings where students reported out on the work they had participated in helped to keep each student accountable for completing substantial research each week.

The final assessments for this section of the course were both oral and written reports. Student groups presented their research to the team from the Tang Museum. Here, the curators and collections manager could ask questions and challenge conclusions before the students finalized their written reports. Because the students had worked as independent teams on their projects, they were able to speak with confidence about their work which resulted in discussions that were of high-quality.

The final report was then written for a non-technical audience. This type of writing is not often emphasized in the chemistry curriculum, so it was important to discuss the best practices for communicating science. It was also helpful to require a rough draft and provide feedback. While peer-review was not performed, this activity may have accomplished the same goals with less work for the instructor. All final information was provided to the Tang Museum for inclusion in a future on-line effort to provide technical information about objects in the collection.