Faith Conferences often provide unanticipated insights into the suhiect of chemistrv and/or its teachine. So i t was a t the ~ i g k hinternational Conference on ~ c e m i c a lEducation held inTokyoin August of this year. The general Conference theme, "Widening the Scope of Chemistry," was developed around four suh-themes: "Chemical Education in the Computer Age," "Chemical Education for Fostering Future Chemists of Excellence," "Chemical Education for the Life Sciences," and "Chemical Education and Industry." Whether listening to plenary lectures and oral presentations, watching demonstrations, or reading poster presentations, thecontinualexpression of faith wasstriking. Theessence of the nosition is caotured hv one soeaker's observation: We are a'ttempting to kducate Gudents'today so that they will he readv to solve future oroblems that have not vet been identified ;sing technologiks not yet invented based on scientific knowledee not vet discovered. "Training," i.e., teaching students to d o the things chemists do, is surelv a part of that education. But, the things that chemists do now &ll probably not he the things thatchemists will do in the future. Some things will have been ahandoned (recall the use of the double pan balance), some will have been altered (electronic calculators replaced the slide rule), and still others may not he taught for a variety of good reasons that will develop with time. Thus, our perception of how best to train future chemists must continuallv evolve in response to both progress in the field and the need to lay the foundation necessary for keeping current in the future. The conclusion is inescapable: students must he taught how to learn and how to construct and use their own knowledge base. If one assumes that scientific knowledge doubles approximately every 15years (a conservative assumption), a chemist who works for 35 years will have acquired about 80% of hisher knowledge during hisher professional lifetime, i.e., following completion of hisher formal education. Training to acquire content is generally well done in our modern svstem of education. Usine teachine methods currentlv available, it is relatively easy to organize such training and assess the students' acouisition of this tvve of knowledge. We do it every day! noth her aspect of Lducation involves helping students develop confidence in their abilities. This is
-
-
a bit more tricky to accomplish. Each student must be brought to some minimal level of com~etenceand then con" viuced (perhaps, convincing yourself in the process) that that level will orovide a sufficient functional basis for hisher futureuse.~h:lswedonotdowellat all, i n general. Similarly, we do not excel in teaching the kinds of self-motivation that are essential to lifetime learning and self-study. Typically, we rely on the students' innate abilities and natural characteristics. Perhaps that's all that we can do. These general areas are, however, rarely the suhject fur discussions focused eood attitudes and on oossihle wavs to helo students develon. " useful mind-sets. Faith is a conceot not often evoked in science or in science education. Yet, in-a sense our fundamental inability to predict future developments and advances with a reasonable degree of accuracy forces us to rely heavily on faith, whether we realize it or not. Indeed, i t is our faith in our current system of science education-whatever i t is-that makes us believe that the problems of the future-whatever they are-will he soluble. With only the sketchiest of clues as to what kinds of problems lie ahead, we must rely on the quality of the individuals-teachers and students alike-currently in the system. This is essentially a statement of our faith in oeoole. . . . hut i t denends on our continued abilitv to attract "good people" into chemistry and teaching chemistrv. Generallv. attractine students into chemistrv has been a proc&; much lrke the anchored anemone, we have waited for prospective students to come to us. With declining enrollments and increased competition for good students, we can no longer afford to assume such a passive posture. In the past, student science training provided regular opportunities for bright and interested high school students to engage in meaningful science activities during their formative years. Although the formal programs have long since disappeared, important remnants still exist around the country. These need to be nurtured, and similar efforts beeun. In short. more oreanized activities must he overtly undertaken to attract and interest students in chemistrv. Faith in . oeoole We . is important. but i t isn't enough. " need a body of people-especially "good" young people-in whom to have faith. JJL
Volume 62
Number 10 October 1965
821
