editoridly /peaking
College Education: What are We About? It seems nowadays like everyone has something to say about higher education. Currently, one of the major issues in this area is that of assessment of higher education. Implicit in the current debate on assessment is the question of the purpose of higher education. If one admits to a need or desire to assess the process of higher education, the question of purpose become an obviously important one. If education is a process, what do we expect to produce by that process? How close did we get to our expectations? How can we improve the process to get closer to the ideal of our expectations? Answering these kinds of questions, produces a line of reasoning which in effect defines the purpose of higher education. Presently the lines seem to he drawn between positions that, at the extremes, can be broadly described as pragmatic or idealistic. The pragmatic view incorporates the relatively new idea that higher education lays claim to a certain proportion of society's resources and logically society requires some kind of statement of the return on its investment. Those who hold this view seem generally to he interested in measuring the value added to the individual by the educational process. Most of those who favor this position also tend to emphasize quantifiable knowledge that can be measured hy student performance on nationally standardized tests. By testing students before, during, and a t the end of their college careers, an institution can discover its educational strengths and weaknesses through "outcomes evaluation" and measure how much has been added to each student's store of knowledge by the educational process. This point of view seems to be prevalent in the report entitled "Time for Results: The Governor's 1991 Report on Education", which has been discussed earlier on this page. The measurable-value-added point of view produces graduates who are optimally fit for a job. They are graduates of, for example, geology and petroleum engineering programs who had been superbly trained to deal with the production prohlems of the West Texas oil fields. Unfortunately, they can do little else. The other view of education-which some call the idealis-
tic point of view-holds that college is a place where students go to learn to appreciate their heritage-both cultural and scientific-where they hone their skills in critical thinking and communication, transferring themselves from selfcentered individuals to persons who will develop into caring members of society. Bloom has taught us that processes that are described by words like "appreciation" are not easy to assess. Thus, outputs for this kind of education are not easily quantified; indeed little is known about how to do this kind of assessment. The idealistic point of view is that education should provide skills that transcend specific jobs and that can be usefully applied in virtually any occupation. In one, perhaps perverse, sense such skills are pragmatically more important than the conventional suhject-oriented skills, for example, those deemed to be important for success in the oilboom economy. From the idealistic point of view, higher education is seen as an end in itself; its purpose is to make one better (another condition difficult to measure), not necessarily richer. For some people richer means better, but for many people better means more nebulous things that are, somehow, more important in the long run. The two extreme views of higher education, interestingly enough, have the common thread of the development of an individual. Both are concerned with content and the cognitive aspects of learning. They differ in what they stress in the assessment ~rocedure.Knowledee. in the Bloom sense. is most ensily assessed, whereas thuse elements of education in which the idealists find interest are !,irrualls im~ossibleto assess. With regard to the latter, one can assess the desired outcome-are the graduates successful (whatever that means)-at a point in time where it's virtually impossible to change the system if the assessment finds the process wanting. Thus, the real danger in the current interest in assessment is the superficial logic that produces a "need to know" that draws us to the reliably easy process of measuring the accumulation of knowledge in the Bloom sense. Under such conditions, the assessment process will certainly produce JJL results-but to what end.
Volume 64
Number 2
February 1987
95
Report of
Ninth Biennial Conference on Chemical Education Montana State University Bozeman, Montana July 27-August 2, 1986
Conference Organizing Committee E. H . Alhotr, Montana State Universitv, tLnd Ruialna .John Amrnd. Montana State U n i v e r d y , I.r.r.01 Trnnwortalrorr .....r~~
Keith Berry, Universiiy of Puget Sound, Early Publicity Dave Brooks, University of Nebraska, Program Chair Denny Brown,Montana State University, Special Equipment Arnold Craig, Montana State University, Mailings Ed Eseudero, St. Johns School, High School Chair Ken Emerson. Montana State Universitv. General Chair Ilarriet ~riedstein.Korherter Institute ;fT?ehnologs, C u u / . ~ r m c eReport
Ed Hmrh, Suuthwrst Texas State Cullrge.2YC~
Dlant. Hewitt, Muntana Statr University. Secretarid Chief
('liff Houk, Ohio University, fi.'arl) Publrrrry L a w J3c k w n . Montana Stare Univcmit$,. , Farnth
.
~&ms Steve Mock, Montana State University, Gmduate Labor Force
Brad Mundy, Montana State University, Local Arrangements J. E. Robhins, Montana State University, Housing and Food I.ynn Sansburn, Montana Smw l!niverrrty, rlccountanr Melnnre Storks, Montana Smre University, Cornpus Confercnrr ('ourdtnaror
Introduction
-
The 9th Biennial Conference on Chemical Education was held at Montana State University in Bozeman, Montana, from July 27 to Aumst 2.1986. The two years of planning by the organizers waskvident in the success of theionference. Over 750 participants, students, spouses, friends, and children attended this seven-day conference that took place in one of the most scenic areas of the country. One only had to look outside to take in the breathtaking mountains, cirrus clouds, and crisp fresh air. When one walked into Strand Union. one could see and feel the excitement. enthusiasm, ~ o t and discussion taking place among the onlv were there exhibits. lectures. demonstrations, and posters; but there were al& ideas to he had in almost every conversation. New members and old members of the Division alike shared memories, and both new and experienced instructors from all levels of chemistry instruction shared ideas involving techniques for presentations, grading, demonstrations, and novel approaches to the standard fare. The variety of topics and configurations of presentations could dazzle just about anyone. The choices were there. The number of people on waiting lists for the workshops were evidence of the interest for new ideas. Rooms that were scheduled for 40 soon became crowded not only with the extra chairs but also with standees. I t became evident that demonstrations were coming into vogue again as people asked pointed questions on how to duplicate successfully what was being shown by the presenter. Along with the popularity of demonstrations, both the session on writing within the chemistry classroom, and the one on strategies and ideas for the intergratiou of the real world into the chemistry curriculum were packed. I t could not escape anyone a t the conference that computers are in, and everywhere. Computer workshops, demonstrations, poster sessions. and handouts were a favorite of manv of the participants. The narrow hall for poster sessions were iammed with shoulder-to-shoulder . people . lookine. listening. watching, and asking questions. 98
.lournnl of Chemical Education
Asking questions and getting answers. . .giving and getting information. . .a dialogue between presenter and participant. . .between newcomer and long-time member.. .between secondary school and college teachers.. .early morning to late at night.. .the collegiality and comradeship of all the participants could not he missed. How can the flavor of the conference best he described? Allen Hovland summarized itvery well, the conference was indeedan "Education across the spectrum." Hamlet G. Frledsteln Conference Editor
Chemistry: Ideas To Reflect Upon Plenary Lectures Webster's dictionary defines "plenary" as fully attended by all who are entitled to be present. That definition is particularly descriptive of the plenary sessions at the 9th BCCE. Judging by thelargenumbers of participants a t these sessions, they were, indeed, well attended. The speakers and their topics indicated the diversity of topics that interested chemical educators.
Hoffman (PL-Ol),in an informative and entertaining lecture, asked and then answered the question: "What do chemists really do?" In his view, what chemists do involves much abstraction, the use of logic, and intellectual invention. This. he said. is not nerceived bv "outsiders". who view chemistry mostly in terms of its technological applications or its environmental impacts. Bv Hoffman's definition. "creativity often comes from bad motivation". According to Hoffman, chemists err if thev a t t e m ~ to t reduce their ideas completely ro those of physics or of mathematics. There are (li;;tinctivelv oriainal chemical conceprs that do not lend themselves to this kind of reduction: A revealing personal disclosure of Hoffman's development from a helper to a collaborator with R. B. Woodward was one of the more touching moments in an altogether masterful performance by one of our great chemists. Reported by: JEB, DKC, ECV. For chemistrv instructors. i t mav be difficult to envision why science can be difficult'for students. Yet, according to both Tobias (PL-02) and Gabel (PL-03). this is necessaw for good teaching. In an attempt to answer the "What makes science difficult?" Tobias developed a program that she has called "Peer Perspectives on Teaching Science". In her program, professors in the humanities and social sciences were invited to attend two series of lectures on physics, one an experimental topic and the other a theoretical topic. They were encouraged to ask questions and record their reactions, both cognitive and emotional responses, to the lectures. Thev were asked to describe both what was clear and what theyfound difficult. Tobias' intent, in the analysis of the comments of the nonscientists. was to develop a hypothesis to explain why science is perceived to be difficult. These nonscientists, all successful teachers in their own areas, were able to verbalize very succinctly the factors that make science "hard". First, they felt a sense of frustration due to a lack of prior knowledge, that is, a frame of reference for the lecture material. Second. thev indicated that the technical words and those specialized words that are used in a specific technical sense needed some definition earlvin the lecture. Third, these leaders found that the materfal that was presented in a straight lecture format offered little encouragement for questions from the audience. They felt that the incorporation of questions throughout the lecture would develop a dialog andingage the student in active learning. Finally, the lecture format alone, in their opinions, did not foster understanding of concepts that are unfamiliar and difficult, and this put a greater burden on the student for self-learning. Demonstrations, Tobias found, were often seen but not ~erceivedbv the student. and the instructor has to exnlain.. recunstntcr, and perhaps even rrpent the demonstration. In sdditiun, she suggested that instructors should offer more
.
98
Journal of Chemical Education
verbal explanations and allow time for thought, all the while resisting the temptation to "get on with it". Gabel discussed three sources of misconceptions in science: ( I ) nuture-it quite ofren is not intuitive, (2) langunge-ordinary word2 often d~ not ha\,e the same meaning when used ina scientific serrinr. -. and (3) tearhina." Particular emphasis was given to the last of these. She stressed that science concepts a t the microscopic level should be taught in the early grades. The introduction of atomic and kinetic molecular theory should be postponed until at least the middle or junior high school years. In her opinion, process skills other than just observing and inferring should be taught. The integrated skills such as formulating hypotheses and controlling variables should be an important part of the science instrucrionul program. After such-a hrid&d network has bern established, new material, including conceptual, theorv-oriented material. can be successfullv introduced. In general, Gahel's thesis was not o n l i t h a t chemistry should be "fun" for elementarv school children but also that it should he meaningful. children need to be helped to grasp simple concepts, to make connections or linkages, and to develop higher order skills gradually. Reported by: CLA, BVE, GER. ~
~
~~~~
In his plenaw lecture E l Sayed (PL-04) presented the ~imrntel-reportpits ronch~simsnbout the present and future roles of chemistry in society and its recommendations abuut the dirrctions that thisruuntry should he headed with respect to chemistry. He nuted that the lnst thorough study of chemistrv. - . the Westheimer revort. . . which was ~roduced over 20 years ago, was made during the "golden age" of science when chemistrv instrumentation was less expensive and financial support &as relatively abundant. As result, the Westheimer report focused only on the intellectual fron-
a
tiers of chemistry. In contrast, in El Sayed's view, today's political, economic, and social climates require that the chemical profession be more skillful and aggressive in producing a good image and in obtaining adequate financial support. He feels that the function of the Pimentel report was to describe the challenges facing chemistry today and to tell chemists of their need to address and to try to solve the problems facing society. T o do this chemists must strengthen the base of scientific policy-making and convince society a t large, including their legislators, that chemistry is worthy of support by society. To fulfill this function, the report examined the benefits of chemistrv to societv and looked a t the maior intellectual frontiers that face chekists today. The benefis that society derived from chemistry were listed as (1) helping LO develop new technologies that would assist in the reversal of o& balance-of-payments deficit, (2) developing new energy resources while improving environmental quality, (3) leading society further into the "polymer age" by making new substances such as stronger polymers, conducting polymers, and new catalyt ic support materials. (4) improving the food production on the planet, (5) extending life and improving the quality 01' life. (6) developing improved biotrvhnological by. staytrchniaues. . . (7) . . continuinr the L1.S. rom~etitiveness . incon the frontiers ufscience and producing asteady stream of vount! scientists, and (8) maintaining a healthy economy. i n adktion, El ~ a y e ddiscussed the;ntellect"al frontiers that chemists will face in the future. In his view, the report told chemists little that they did not already know about the importance of their field. Rather its role was to convince society of chemistry's importance. In response to an audience question about why the report did not discuss, in a major way, undergraduate education, El Sayed said that t o keep the United States in the forefront of chemical research will reauire new scientists, all of whom must be educated as undergraduate chemistry majors. Thus, he concluded. suooort for research imdicity the . . recognizes . need for sup&ortf& chemical education. Reported by: WRC, SVS, MDS. ~
1
~
In his report, entitled "Tomorrow", Yankwich (PL-051, the chairman of the ACS Chemistry Education Task Force, described the work of the Task Force, which was completed two years ago; then he outlined and evaluated the subsequent efforts to implement the main recommendations. Yankwich spoke to a near-capacity audience Tuesday evening, giving his listeners his criticisms (and praise, where merited) of the ACS, the NSF, and recent federal budgetary
decisions for the lack of Droeress in certain key areas. Undergraduate education in science was characterized as being in "a lamentable state", in sharp contrast to elementary, secondary, and graduate educaiion. On the other hand, the recommendation to expand efforts to inform the public has been enthusiastically supported by the ACS, which has begun a $16 million campaign to reach that end. Progress in ensuring an adequate supply of scientifically trained individuals will occur, in Yankwich's view, only when the currently favored "pipeline strategy" in Washington is replaced by a more reasoned and permanent strategy to invest wisely in measures to improve the many facets of science education and general science literacy.
. . . Dedication that conferees have to acquiring knowiedge in this area. The night sessions have gone to 11 p.m. and people have stayed. When 50 people stay until the end, it tells you something about the quality of the programs. "
One significant finding of the Task Force concerned barriers to full opportunity for women and minorities in the chemical workplace. One result of this was the decision by the ACS Women Chemists Committee to cosponsor a conference to examine the causes of barriers to women and ways to remove them. In addition, Yankwich reported that other weak areas of concern to chemists are (1) inadequate number of good chemistry teachers and good chemistry materials; (2) too little laboratory experience, especially in high school; (3) poor articulation between academia and industry; and (4) arbitrary barriers to career preparation and progress. Solutions to the problems were addressed in terms of different levels of education-elementary, secondary, twoyear college, college, and university. A few of the recommendations to resolve some of the more significant failures were to (1) prepare a five-year plan to improve chemistry education in high schools, (2) promote the allocation of at least 30% of class time to student laboratory work, (3) study the curriculum of the chemistry courses for nonchemistry mathe aualifications of teachers through di.iors.. (4) . . imorove . rect service programs,and (5) expand the use and de"e1opment of computers and other information technologies in science education. Yankwich said that efforts to promote professional cooperation with the societies of other disciplines hareapparentIy foundered. A proposal to establish regional science renters has also not been met with a positive response. On the positive side, Yankwich rated the efforts of ACS and AAAS to begin to improve elementary and middle school science. At present, he noted, NSF is considering a orooosal for science education at the elementaw level. T'he "bottom-line report card" was promott popular courrp in the whud -and w r of the rechniquer presented can help any of us toapproach rho! lewl! Reported by: BHA, DDA, JB, MBC, GER, SVS, JPW. In another workshop, "Development of an Experiment from Observations", participants were involved in developing experiments that illustrated principles of equilibria and Le Chatelier's Principle. Neidig and Teates (WK-10) offered practical suggestions for planning experiments. In their opinion, it was important to involve students in the exnansion of exneriments into research areas. The Dresenters stressed the importance of careful observation and significant conclusions if the student is to retain the ~rinciples. ~ e ~ o r t by: e hBRC. 106
Journal of Chemical Education
Applications As one illustration of the applications of chemistry, in this .. casc the rclntionship between art and chemistry, Coleman workshop and Sturtevant (\VK-l:, directed a very. .popular . in electroplating techniques for jewelry. This session allowed the participants to electroplate a leaf. The presenters discussed the-necessary equipment, the costs,-and problems kvolved. Reported by: MBC In JCPDS-ICDD Workshon. Jenkins and McCarthv a detailed study of powder (WK-21) offered the diffraction and X-rav fluorescence analvsis. There was considerable background information about X-rays, including X-rav fluorescence and the Powder Diffraction File, which was familiar to most of the participants. The workshop participants were given a few examples in class, then a homework assignment use a lab computer to solve some of the more complicated problems, mostly mixReported by: BHA, JDC. ture analyses. Jenkins (EX-01) reviewed the history of the Shroud of Turin and its movements to its present location and discussed the evidence supporting various theories about the origins of the shroud. He reported the plans of STURP (Shroud of Turin Research Proiect) to continue to studv this artifact. Important characteristics bf the image agreedipon bv the team of scientists are its three-dimensional character, its photo-negative aspect, and the surface nature of the imace. Planned investiaations include carbon dating and blood analysis. Jenkins sa; that science will never be able toprove that the shroud is genuine, but so far i t has not proved i t is a fraud. Reported by: KB, SVS. In a poster session, Houk (PO-09) issued a warning about the use of K3Fe(CN)6or any other cyanides that are used in photography and art laboratories because of the hydrogen cyanide that may be produced by heat, ultraviolet light, or acids. Reported by: BHA.
Learning Chemistry through Computers
and find out how it works was agood way to relieve computer
Everywhere one looked there were computers, computer software, computer demonstrations, questions, more questions, answers, and more answers. Participants and presenters alike found the dialogue useful and stimulating. There were simulations, spreadsheets, tutorials, videodiscs, and even expositions o f t h e philosophy of a,mp~~ter/chemistry integration. That we are at the threshold of new and exciting ways of utilizing the computer in both the laboratory and the classroom was evident. In a svm~osiumon comnuter a~olications.model aoproaches'to t h e implementakon of computer hardware A d softwareasintegralaids to the chemistrv teacher on hoth the secondary and college level were presented. James (CS-01) noted that the large attendance a t the comnuter svm~osia . . indicates great interest in computer usage among chemists. He pointed out that, while most schools have made Progress in acquiring hardware, in many schools little practical use is made of the computer to aid the chemistw teacher. In a recent survey sent to two- and four-year college chemistry teachers, James found that 46%made no use of the computer a t all. Beatty (CS-04) discussed the first decade of microcomputer usage in a liberal arts college chemistw " deoartment. descrihingits impact as more evoktionary than revolution: ary. At this particular institution, word and information processing has been found t o he the most useful, while CAI is only modestly beneficial. Their approach to the use of computers was gradual and realistic kith the result that "computers rank with Xerox machines, transparencies, etc., as - - - -~-.. instructional aids. certainlv below chalk-and-hlackhnnrd". ~ e r m a n - ~ o b i n s oann i Marek (CS-02) demonstrated the use of SERAPHIM kits and software in some classroom interfacing experiments. In their opinion, each high school student should use the computer for at least one experiment during the year. Roe (CS-03) showed a videotape of his integrated classroom hardware arrangement. His students used the computers to collect data and to learn robotics. He suggested that allowing students to ~ utogether t a computer
Hartman (CS-05) proposed guidelines for meaningful and successful integration of the computer into the chemistry classroom. He discussed different approaches; for the teacher with limited availability of hardware, he emphasized that even one computer could he an effective tool. Soltzberg (CS-06) discussed the use of a classroom computer with appropriate software as lecture aids for improving the attentiveness of students. However, he cautioned against plunging into experimental and costly new technologies and recommended waiting for evidence of reliability and "critical-mass" utilization. In effect, he suggested that before purchasing any equipment one should conceptualize what is needed in the way of computer capability to enhance the chemistry curriculum. In another presentation (CC-04) Soltzberg strongly urged that teachers make use of microcomputers within their classrooms. In this session, he described a software package, which, by animating dynamic processes, can demonstrate difficult concepts, such as Rutherford's atomic structure and Bronsted acids and bases. By utilizing the microcomputer and a projection devicelmonitor, Soltzberg (CH-23) also demonstrated a dynamic lecture simulation technique. A broad sense of the interaction of chemical systems with computers was felt throughout the conference, from the symposia to the "hands-on" sessions to the shoulder-toshoulder people in the hallway lookingat the poster sessions. This linkage between chemistry and machine, although still in its infancy, was broader and more keenly felt a t this conference than ever before. Davenport (IF-01) presented a lecture demonstration of the bleaching of phenolphthalein and showed how, usina colorimetric standards and an overhead projector, the ratr data rould be rollrcwd through an intrrfare to a computer via a Blocktronir from SERAPHIM. Gutzmann and Walters (IF-02) discussed the need to have the teaching objectives dictate the choice of the instrumentation and mode of computer interfacing. They emphasized determining first how to solve chemical nrohlems and then deciding how to interface computers rather than merely looking for ways to utilize a given computer-interfaced
anuiat,, -....."J.
&
~
~~
~
~~~~~~
~~~~~~
~
Volume 64 Number 2
February 1987
107
svstem. As an examnle of this. thev exnlained a titration 3 2 interface experiment in which H balance with a " ~ ~ - i serial is used instead of the usual volumetric elassware and in which an interfaced pH meter is used to detkct the endpoint. Estell (IF-05) discussed the use of the gameport of an Apple computer as an inexpensive interfacing device and the software modifications that are possible. Lisensky (IF-06 and CH-10) expressed the opinion that the goal of computer interfacing was to make things easier. He used an ADALAB interface to modify an Apple 11. By doing so, he was able to develop a program with which a student could practice, by computer, adjusting an NMR instrument in order to become more efficient on the actual NMR. Amend (IF-07) descrihed the revisions in the freshman chemistry program a t Montana State University to provide student computer work stations for tutorials, data acquisition and analvsis. and recordingof grades. he program began with the acquisition of detectors for chemical system changes and the development of an easily constructed; low-cost interface card for use with the detectors and the microcomputers a t the work stations. Computers were shown to be useful in the teaching of chemistry, hut it was pointed out that many factors should be examined if one is to make ontimum use of their notential as a teachingAearning tool. For one, careful planning is necessary. Rayner-Canham (CW-01) discussed the development of course software and the use of computers to assist teachers, especially in writing text materials and for providing a computer-assisted drill program. For those still hesitant about getting started, Clevenger (CW-02) offered suggestions on how to begin using computers when colleagues and administration are supportive of computer implementation. Burmeister (CW-03), on the other hand, descrihed strategies to overcome resistance from administration and reported a major, newly completed CBI project, including the pitfalls and the triumphs. In another oresentation. Gable (CW-04) offered manv useful suggestions for making CAI sdftware "user friendly". He demonstrated. hv examde. the need for dealine effectively with innocuo&, routine 'details, that, if ignored, can compromise the effectiveness of an otherwise good program. Participants heard from Cabrol (CW-05 and CH-03), who descrihed the use of the PROLOG language in chemical education, pointed out that PROLOG is capable of representing nonnumerical information and of inferring logical deductions from a hasic set of facts and rules. Fasching (CH-26) descrihed the use of the LISP language for the development of the "Chem-Tutor", an interactive CAI system hased on artificial intelligence techniques called expert svstems. Each of these sessions on innovative use of computers was filled to ca~acitv. . .. with peonle standine around the frinees of the room and even huddled outside tge door for a chance to hear. I t did not matter whether the s ~ e a k e rwas from a secondary school, a two-year college, or a four-year college. Each new idea or new approach to a problem was meeted enthusiastically by the audience. One such presentation was the interactive computerized video experiments demonstrated by Smith and Jones (CC01 and CH-01) before an overflow crowd. They found that students who had received both the laboratory experience and the video simulation, or only the latter, scored better than those receiving only the lahoratory experience. One participant commented, From the standooint of one who has witnessed the evolution of CAI trchnolocy such as PLATO,and for thme courses in which CAI r i appnrpriatr, the new t p c h n o h ~is a vast improvement over the computer-simulated manipulation of laburator).i n 9 t r u mentation and procedures. Such an inteeration allows a close annroach to actual lahoratory and is ;particularly useful fo; kxperiments which are dangerous or unavailable for various reasons. 108
Journal of Chemical Education
r reduce the tedium hut not the The use of the c o m ~ u t e to chemistry, in a program called "Chempac", was described by Saltzhurn (CH-02 and CC-02). This . nroeram involves no " simulations hut rapidly manip"lates and analyzes data. The experiments were designed to he open-ended and to provide supplemental challenges to the high school and the first-year college student. One of the reasons for lahoratory exercises is to help develop the mental skills of the students. Lagowski (CC-03) descrihed a series of computer-simulated experiments to allow the student to select equipment, materials, and procedures; each step involves decision making on the part of the student. There are no riaht or wrone choices. accordiue to Lagowski, just more efficient or le~sefficient'strate~ies-selected from menus carefully designed to enhance the ease of the decision-making process. In another demonstration, Beamish (CH-28) showed CASL (Computer Assisted Science Labs), a commercially available program for chemistry students. In different sessions, Torop (CC-05 and CH-29) demonstrated the use of the "App1eworks"spreadsheet software to create an electronic notebook. The advantages, according to Torop, are the extended data treatments that are possible and the ability for the student to save the worksheet and use it later with a word processor and to process the data within the lahoratory period and correct any experimental errors before leaving the lab. PLATO has been used by Martin (CH-14) to produce the neutralization game, a spreadsheet to predict the direction or products of a reaction involving acids and bases. The opportunity for the participants to tryout some of the imaginative computer s
