Chemistry for Everyone edited by
Curricular Change Digests
Baird W. Lloyd Miami University Middletown Middletown, OH 45042
Chemistry and Warfare: A General Studies Course
W
E. Eugene Gooch Chemistry Department, Elon University, Elon, NC 27244;
[email protected] There has been substantial and sustained interest in developing unique liberal arts courses with an emphasis on chemistry (1–11). These courses are a mechanism to promote interest in chemistry among students with potential for achievement in the sciences. Also, they give a greater appreciation of chemistry’s key concepts and practical applications to students majoring outside the sciences. Courses focusing on chemistry and history are well represented in undergraduate curricula; however, the role of chemistry in warfare is not commonly covered. This is a bit surprising, since declared and undeclared wars have been a constant and unpleasant reality throughout recorded history (12). Background and Structure of the Course Elon University includes in its requirements for the bachelor’s degree a 300–400-level interdisciplinary seminar outside the student’s major field of study. Enrollment is limited to 24 students per course. Prerequisites for these seminars are encouraged but not required—discretion is left to the instructor when the course is being developed. For this course, an adequate prerequisite was deemed to be one course in chemistry at the high school or college level. Students should have some exposure to a few technical terms and most basic definitions found in a chemistry text for nonmajors. In accordance with initiatives to promote writing across the curriculum, half of each student’s grade is based on writing assignments, which include a term paper and various shorter assignments. The idea for “Chemistry and Warfare” originated with a seminar presented during the allied air phase of the 1990– 1991 Persian Gulf war. It focused on chemical weapons, their effects and countermeasures. Owing to substantial concern about the possible use of chemical weapons by Iraq, response to the seminar was good. Informal discussions on these topics continued for weeks, and interest remained high. The concept of the seminar evolved into a more comprehensive interdisciplinary seminar course. Since the common negative connotations associated with “chemicals” are reinforced when chemical weapons are discussed, it was decided to broaden the scope of the course. A primary goal developed: to demonstrate the wide and positive impact of chemical technology on human affairs, and to separate the “chemistry” from the “warfare”. Additional topics with peacetime applications are included: conventional explosives, medical applications, and materials science. (Topics covered are summarized in Box 1.) Basic principles in chemistry (gas laws, states of matter, stoichiometry, etc.) are commonly applied during the course. However, technical details are minimized and most exam questions involving chemistry are conceptual rather than quantitative. A typical class meets for 100 minutes twice a week. Questions and answers about assigned reading or previous 820
material are followed by a 25–40-minute presentation from the topic list. A variety of videotaped programs are useful during selected classes (13, 14). The last 30–35 minutes of the period are reserved for a regional conflict simulation. Four unit exams and one final exam are part of the course assessment. Regional Conflict Simulation The use of role-playing activities to enhance learning is well documented (15). We decided to place the students in a situation where they would have to deal with the threat of a potential or actual military situation. The class was divided into groups of 3–4. Each group invented a fictional country and wrote a description of it (for general use). Each person in the group assumed the role of a government leader, military commander, ambassador, or other official. In response to a set of questions (Box 2), each group wrote a statement of objectives to be accomplished during the simulation. Each country used ecomonic “resource points” either as currency to build military forces or to give economic aid or loans to other countries. Each week, the student groups interacted in a diplomacy–economics session as each country tried to fulfill its objectives. If a “shooting war” started, the military phase was modeled by using a commercial board war-game.1 Additional rules simulated the use of chemical weapons. The instructor refereed, interpreting and ensuring compliance with the simulation rules. He also assumed the role of the international press, communicating developments to the class. A Web page was maintained with links to fictional press stories and maps showing the progress of the conflict. Each country had to assess the current diplomatic and military situation and act or react to it. Students were encouraged to write short speeches or press releases consistent with events; this added Box 1. Topics Covered in “Chemistry and Warfare” Ancient technologies: metallurgy, swords and armor, Greek fire, materials science, Portland cement, and fortifications
Conventional low and high explosives: gunpowder, TNT, picric acid, fulminate of mercury Biography: Alfred Nobel and family Chemistry enhances military medicine: surgical antiseptics, antibiotics (sulfa drugs) and anesthetics (chloroform, ether, sodium pentothal) Types of chemical warfare agents: choking, blistering, blood gases, nerve gases; physical properties and biological effects; historical use; countermeasures: protective clothing, masks, detectors and neutralization Case studies: environmental/ethical issues associated with warfare: the global problem of minefields Case studies: Chemical and biological weapons used by terrorists
Journal of Chemical Education • Vol. 79 No. 7 July 2002 • JChemEd.chem.wisc.edu
Chemistry for Everyone
Box 2. Questions Used in Developing Objectives for a Regional Conflict Simulation To what degree will you seek to influence the actions of other countries? To what degree will you seek to accrue economic wealth? Will you seek to promote or contain military conflicts between your neighbors? Will your national borders be expanded, maintained, or flexible? How much of your economic resources will be used to maintain an army? How much will you spend to develop chemical weapons technology? Will it be offensive or defensive technology? Under what conditions will you enter a military conflict? To what degree will you try to avoid a conflict? Under what conditions will you use chemical weapons in a military conflict? If another country develops chemical weapons or uses them, how will you react? Will you use diplomatic pressure, economic aid, or a military threat to accomplish your objectives? Prioritize your (economic, diplomatic, and military) objectives. Which objectives will you abandon in order to fulfill others? Box 3. Term Paper Titles from “Chemistry and Warfare” The Chemistry of Blood Substitutes Drugs Used in the Treatment of Malaria International Agreements Regulating Manufacture/Use of Chemical Weapons The Chemistry and Biological Effects of Mustard Portrayal of CBW in Films and Television History of the DuPont Corporation Defensive Measures Against Chemical Weapons Developed by the German Army Environmental Effects of Chemical Weapons Use Use of Plastic Explosives in Special Forces Operations The Chemical Bases of Gulf War Syndrome Chemical Weapons as Portrayed in the Comics Biographies of Nobel Prize (Chemistry) Winners
some color and detail to the simulation. At term’s end a part of a class session was used to assess the simulation. Objectives for all groups were revealed, and the class discussed how well each country had fulfilled its objectives. Assessment and Conclusion The course has worked quite well for several reasons. Since it is one of many options students have to satisfy the interdisciplinary seminar requirement for their degrees, it is chosen by students who are receptive to the study of history and/or science. Although science majors comprise less than 25% of the class, science phobia is rare. The diversity of topics is consistent with the objectives of a liberal arts course and prevents the class sessions from becoming stale. Term paper topics are as diverse as the student population (Box 3). Since a significant number of students are familiar with role-playing games, students are very receptive to participating in the simulation. A few take the simulation rather seriously! Students learn an object lesson in both “international” and personal relations, since it is usually impossible for one group
to substantially affect the outcome of the simulation. The limitations of a simulation become evident as it progresses; in the assessment session, most students have admitted that they would have expended resources and military forces more conservatively if the war had been longer and not just a “paper” war. Several students connected the analogy of the simulation to the use of models in the scientific method. The assessment is valuable in another way: students realize how complex relations between nations can develop and evolve. Conflict is difficult to prevent and easy to escalate. It should be noted that students have not perceived this as a “pro-warfare” course. Descriptions of warfare in general and chemical warfare in particular can be graphic. The savagery of warfare becomes evident when students read personal accounts of war veterans. Students usually surf the Web during the course; they discover numerous Web sites, some with images that are disturbing. Students leave the course with the realization that modern technological warfare with its capability to kill on a massive scale is not a game—it is something to be avoided. The role of chemistry in advancing medical technology and materials science is a revelation to most students. Positive perceptions of chemistry are substantially enhanced by including these topics. It has been evident from the writing assignments as well as the class evaluations that virtually all students leave the course with a favorable view of chemical technology. In teaching evaluations, most students have said they would like to take a similar course in the future. WSupplemental
Material Information about the course for students, including FAQs and details of the regional conflict simulation, are available in this issue of JCE Online. Note 1. Blitzkrieg, © 1965, 1975 by the Avalon Hill Co. Baltimore, MD. Available in selected toy and hobby stores such as the Hungate’s chain. Other commercial games could be adapted for the course, such as Risk, by Parker Brothers, or computer games like Warlords, from Strategic Studies Group. Additional information about the modified war game rules is available online.W
Literature Cited 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.
Scimone, Angelina A. J. Chem. Educ. 1993, 70, 519. Steiner, Richard. J. Chem. Educ. 1985, 62, 762. Brasted, Robert C. J. Chem. Educ. 1983, 60, 29. Thorne, James M. J. Chem. Educ. 1975, 52, 114. Kolb, K. E.; Taylor, Max A. J. Chem. Educ. 1973, 50, 502. Vanderryn, Jack. J. Chem. Educ. 1958, 35, 256. Douglas, John E. J. Chem. Educ. 1992, 69, 907. Malachowski, Mitchell R. J. Chem. Educ. 1988, 65, 439. Ham, Russell. J. Chem. Educ. 1980, 57, 490. Miller, D. P. J. Chem. Educ. 1977, 54, 694. Borer, Londa L. J. Chem. Educ. 1976, 53, 574. Battles: A Concise Dictionary; Hogg, I. V., Ed.; Harcourt-Brace: San Diego, 1995. 13. Kaboom! WGBH: Boston, 1997 [Nova, Videotape]. Terror in the Minefields; WGBH: Boston, 1996 [Nova, Videotape]. 14. The Century of Warfare; Nugus/Martin Productions, 1994 [Videotape]; available through Time-Life Video. 15. Jackson, P. T.; Walters, J. P. J. Chem. Educ. 2000, 77, 1019 and references therein.
JChemEd.chem.wisc.edu • Vol. 79 No. 7 July 2002 • Journal of Chemical Education
821
