EDITORIALLY SPEAKING
"Retreading the Chemistry Teacher," ;\rthur F. Scott's SAMA amwd address published i l l this issue. is a keenlv ne~iet,ratiueanalvsis of a crucial " . problem. Many who heard his remarks at Cleveland began t,o turn their crit,ical gaze inward a t their own careem. As is usually the ease wheu a problem vomes into clear focus, corollary prohleuis begin to emerge. One such shatt,ering of complacency can he phrased thus: "Granted that I rould ever fiud myself in that, Ctopian state of being able t,o keep up to date, how can I mauage to do t,he same for my students?" The challenge which must be fared is, "Am 1 making sure that my st,udents are well informed hy toda:~/'s stnudards, not hy those I niet when my rarrer began?" Dr. Scott sugge*ts that t,he rate at which chemical kno~vledgeexpandi; doul)l~severy 1?1 years. Does this meail that a teacher must be covering twice as mudl nxlterial in his course today ns he did only 13 years ago? It might well he argued that this is his ohligatirm if he is to graduate a prcsent student a t a relative level of competenre eqnal to t,hat he provided for t,he 13-year alumnus. Obviously, s t u d ~ ~hcing ~ t s what they are-approximately constant i l l ability, eifirienry, and amI)iti~m over a 18-year period-thc tearher cannot, rover two hooks instead of one or assigu 30 experiment,^ i n plaw of 15. Likewise it is not possible to apply simple arithmetic to t,he currirulum and dnu1)le rourse mquiremenls for the college chemistry major. The answer to t.hir continuing rhallruge t,o the vhemistry teacher has to he found in h o he ~ teaches his sn1,ject. He constantly must be rritical of t,he 1~orite111 IJS his courses and be willing to modify by replacemenl. rather t,han merely hy arcretion as the years go 011. I t is the honest and courageous professor who rips up the notes of his fawrite lecture--or leaves i n the tilr the problem assignment that "really drove the poi111. home." This he must do if old favorites have heroni~! engulfed by broader. more signifirant hopirs. , 1here are cert,ain !~uilt,-inaspect.; of rhemical svirnw! xliirh keep the p r ~ h l e mflr~mheing a dilemma for t.hc chemist~ryteacher. Onc: inrarinhly emerges from I L V ~ I I -
-
.
nirl~tr1111 the proper r a l , i ~01 descriptive to theoretical rourse runtent material. h l o d e r ~sriewe, ~ in con ant.'^ apt phrase, is constantly "lowering the level of enipiririsni." Correlating theories exist. today that make nrore meailingful and henre better retained the isolated fart,ual information of yesterday. Even before theories appear, srientifir laws emphasizing the relationships hetweeu events make possihle t,he efficiency of prediction over trial and error. Tearhers who approarh the suhjevt. from t,his realizatio~~ need to gn one step farther ilnd be a Mtle obvious sometimes to get a student to rwognize t,his point of view. I t can help him to make 11wt use of the years hrb is inresting i l l his training for :L snient,ific rareer. Another efficienny d w i w ri~nstantlyheing used l ~ y p ~ v e p t i v et.eachers is (he lalx~ratoryexperiment t,hal. ltwhes more that1 on^ pri~triplerather t,hau merely n single technique. Part,icularly i l l intmduct,ory roursw can one st,oue kill many hirds. I
