Scholarship and Chemistry Teaching in the Two-Year College Sudhir 6. Abhyankar, Arthur M. ad, Patrick K. Monaghan, Robert R. Perkins2, Geoffrey W. Rayner Canham3, J. Norman Reed4, Michael J. Webbs Sir Wilfred Grenfell College, Corner Brook, NF, Canada A2H 6P9
It is generally accepted that the primary function of an instructor in a two-vear colleae is to teach (I). Thus the role & is significantly differof an instructor in t ~ o - ~ ecollege ent from that of his of her colleagues in larger, degreegranting institutions. However, there is evidence t o show that a monotonous diet of repetitive teaching may result in a decline in performance (2): ;problem that is becoming more serious with the steady increase in the average age of college faculty (3). The need for faculty to participate in some kind of professional development appears to be accepted in a wide variety of institutions. Such professional development may assume a number of forms: taking university up-grading courses (4), attending conferences and reading journals in order to remain current in one's field (5).acting as professional consultant or serving on committees of educational organizations (6). . .. workine with student organizations (7), participating in faculty excLange programs (8). attending in-service training programs (8, 9), taking sabbatical leaves (91, engaging in cross-disciplinary and multidisciplinary studies, and developing courses and curricula (7, 10). We see value in all of these activities, but feel that publication-oriented scholarship can also be added t o this list, even in the "teaching" college. The authors of this article are, or have been, faculty members a t Sir Wilfred Grenfell College, asmall two-year college on the west coast of Newfoundland, Canada. In the 15 years since the College opened, the chemistry department has encouraged its faculty members to develop excellence in both teaching and scholarship. At this point in our history, we feel it is appropriate todiscuss some of the forms that our scholarlv activity has taken in order to encourage other college insiructors b embark on similar projects. A preliminary and somewhat outdated report has appeared elsewhere (1I). In the discussions that follow, we will mention a selection of the publications from the department. A complete list of these publications can be supplied upon request.
a
The Slr Wilfred Grenfell College The Grenfell College was established in 1975 as a two-year campus of Memorial University of Newfoundland. Approximately 600 k m separates the College from the four-year campus of the University. The chemistry department a t the College has consisted of four faculty members and four fulltime support staff for most of that time. Over the 15years of the College's existence, various personnel changes have occurred in the department, but the interest in scholarship has
not changed. Additional details ahout the department have been published previously (12). We have been very fortunate in having strong support in our scholarly endeavors both from our colleagues in other departments and from the College administration. This is an important factor, for as Chapin notes (7): A facultymember capable of a significantcontribution in aparticular area often fails to contribute not because of inadequate compensation, but because of too little or complete absence of any recognition whatsoever. The lack of recognition may be by other faculty members as well as administrative personnel. A faculty member is unlikely to continue efforts in an area his colleagues or administration belittle.
Frontier Research This is the most difficult type of intellectual activity in a small college. Among the many likely problems to be encountered in the "nonresearch" setting are: inadequate equipment and research space, limited access to costly research journals and monographs, a lack of technical assistance (technicians, graduate students, research assistants), inadequate funding, isolation (geographic andlor intellectuall. unsvmoathetic administrators. and. ~ e r h a ereatest ~s of all: hea& teaching loads (11,13) and thLcons;q&t lack of time for research work. Nevertheless, we have had some success in the field of synthetic organic chemistry. These studies have resulted in publications on reactions of adamantanes (14) and the synthesis of novel cyclic compounds project in analytical chemistry wine lithium reagents (15). A . . has d s o been completed (16). T o aid research in organic chemistry, we can utilize an NMR spectromewr that 7s normally used in our second-year organic course. Also, members of the Chemistry Department ofthe camous of Memorial Universitv have kindlv .~ - - four-vear -~ " performed a numbe; of measurements, such GC-MS anh high resolution NMR on newly synthesized compounds. We were fortunate to obtain some "starter" research and to hire summer students. mants to ourchase eauioment .. However, with the slow rate of progress in our research, i t has been im~ossibleto maintain regular research funding. More recentiy, we obtained two small Foundation grants and we have managed to continue to hire summer students using a Canadian Federal Government summer student funding program. This program enables students to work in an environment that will provide the necessary skills toward a future career. However, it is very difficult to maintain the impetus of frontier research. As we do not have any dedicated research soace. almost all research eauioment must be removed from ~, the laboratory before the beginning of each semester. Thus, even if time is found during teaching semesters to perform frontier research, there is usually no space in which to do it. Finallv. ". the level of activitv in chemical research as it is. workers who may take several summers to complete a single project can often find their work preempted by other re~~~
~~~
' Currentlv at Athabasca University, Athabasca. AB, Canada TOG Currently at Kwantlen College. Surrey, BC. Canada V3T 5H8. corresaondence should be addressed. .Author to .. whom . .. - Currently at Cariboo College. Kamloops. BC. Canada V2C 5N3. Currently at York Universily, North York. ON. Canada M3J 1P3. 7~
~~
~~
~
as
-
-
2RO.
~~
A
~
~
~
~
Volume 68 Number 2
February 1991
145
searchers. Thus i t is wise to choose a research field that is not highly competitive. The major benefit of conducting frontier research in a two-vear colleee is the ooportunitv to involve undergraduate students in t h i thrill o f d i s c o v e j (17).As Purser and Scull remark (18):"The imoortance of research at the community college l&l is not so much in what is discovered, hut what is shared in the discovery process." We have been very fortunate over the years in finding a number of freshman and sophomore students who have performed outstanding work, in spite of their limited chemical knowledge. Several of the students, in fact, chose to follow chemistr&related careers as a result of their summer experiences. However, a t a two-year college, one has the challenge that - new students must he trained each summer. With their lack of familiarity with specialized experimental techniques, sunervisine these students can he an almost full-time summer activity. Findine a suitable iournal in which t o publish can also be difficult.>ome reviewers expect all researchers to have utilized state-of-the-art instrumentation and such facilities are simply not widely available in the college setting. Although i t is difficult to confirm from our own experiences, there bas been documentation that submissions from small, littleknowncollegesare more likely to be rejected than those from more prestigious institutions (19).
-
-
Teachina-Related ScholarshlD We feel that teaching-related scholarship is a crucial activitv for science facultv, .. not only in a two-year college, hut undergraduate institutionas well. Our rationale is as in follows. In the social sciences, research topics often relate directly to the freshman or sophomore course content. On the other hand, the frontier research of a physical scientist is usually only comprehensible to a graduate or senior undergraduate student of the specialty. As one of us has commented elsewhere (20),the teaching duties of science faculty are often relegated to a lower status than their research activities. Yet, a t the same time, science teaching presents instructors with some of the more difficult pedagogical challenges, with the need to auestion traditional course content, to devise better ways or describing abstract concepts, and to provide new and innovative laboratory experiments. I t is in the area of chemical education that a college instructor can make a significant contribution. With comparatively small class sizes and a more interactive teaching environment than most universities, the college teacher is better able to introduce innovative course design (21)or devise and class test new experiments (22). However, it is important that such work be disseminated. As Hativa comments (23): r r ~ ~ ~ nt l~lavr h e r sdo not ronvev their creative ideas nor do thev ~.~~~ ~, draxerninate their benrfirial teaching aids t o other cearhers. Only a w r y small proportion olthese idrnsnnd materiaIrareprerented at conventions or is sent to be published in a professional journal. Thus, the majority of original creative teaching ideas and materials is being lost when the instructor stops teaching that topic. We also consider that the process of writing an account of a new experiment or teaching method is in itself an important activity. Christoplos and Valletutti remark (24):"The solitary task of putting ideas on paper, where they can he carefully and repeatedly subjected to leisurely analysis, is a necessary sequel to the more spontaneous aspects of the teaching process if the scholarliness is to he objectified." We would add that, in our view, such teaching-related papers should he produced with the same concern for literature references and meaningful content as a frontier research paper. Over the years, many chemical education papers have come t o our notice that lack cited relevant work andlor "reinvent" some previously published approach or experiment. Such superficial articles do not show evidence of scholarship (25). 146
Journal of Chemical Education
In our own case, we have found that informal discussions among ourselves and the circulation of written drafts to colleagues prove invaluable in the development of critical thinking and concise writing. The department functions in many ways as a support group, a common phenomenon in the arts but a rarity in the sciences (26). Many of our teaching-related publications concern courses offered a t the College. These courses have been described elsewhere (27). Much of our effort in the area of course development has been directed towards our course, Foundation Chemistry, an introductory course for students who have no previous hackground in chemistry. As we were unable to find a preparatory college chemistry text that emphasized basic skills, rather than attempting to cover the whole of general chemistry at a superficial level, we produced our own text for this course (28).A summer immersion format of this course was devised to enahle students to gain a basic understanding of chemistry during the summer immediately preceding their admission to the college. A nractical o h t o f this summer course utilized short exoeriLents tha't we called "mini-labs" (29),a very successfuiidea that we subseauentlv incoroorated in the regular fall and winter offerin& of the preparatory ~hemistr;course. More recently, we have developed some computer software that can he used to supplement lecture-based teaching methods in such a preparatory course (30). With the limits of faculty time, we have not so far produced any novel changes in our General Chemistry courses. The most interesting work relating to these courses has been in terms of the teaching of chemical concepts through analogies (31),in using a postage stamp display to illustrate particular facets of chemistry (329,in the application of chemical principles to everyday life (33),and in the development of new or modified laboratory experiments (34).In the latter. we were aided in large part by our lahoratorr instructional assistants. Over the &xt two years, we hope to introduce some of the microscale techniques devised by Mills and Hampton (35)into the laboratory component of our courses reduced-scale experiments of and to produce some original . our own. Our sophomore organic chemistry course has been the object of a great many innovations. With the trend away from full-scale toward microscale organic experiments, we felt that the semimicroscale was a possible compromise that had been overlooked. This scale gives enough product that the beginning organic student can still perform classical tests. At the same time, the scale is small enough to significantlv reduce reagent cost (36).A complete switch to flameless heating methids accompanied theintroduction of semimicro eauioment. In another innovation, some existing experimen& were modified to use household bleach is an inexpensive oxidant (37). As part of the sophomore inorganic chemistry course, we incorporated a significant proportion of descriptive material and, in particular, we emphasized the use of visual aids (38). A puhlication on the true allotropes of sulfur resulted from a written and oral presentation made by a student as part of the course requirement (39). During the teaching of this course, it became apparent that many inorganic chemistry texts overlooked the importance of kinetic versus thermodynamic control of reactions. As a result, one of us researched and subsequently produced an article on the complexities of this topic (40). High School Related Work In addition to the development of chemical education a t the tertiary level, college chemistry faculty can also forge important links to those involved in teaching science at the secondary level. This collaboration can be in the form of participation in local school science meetings or the role as a chemistry resource person. For example, one of us (SBA) has
5131,4647: (bl Rawer-CanhamG. W.: Rayner-CsnhamM. F. J. Computers Moth.
.
~
~
9. Kanrsd, A.G. cnn.'J. HighsrEduc. 1983.13(21.13-25. 10. Schwartz, L. L.lmprouing Collegeppand Univmity Teaching 1983,31,65-68. 11. Wobb, M J.: Last, A. M.: Pockins, R. R.; Rayner-Canham, G. W. J. College Sci. Tpnchiw 1982/83.12,437441. 12. Alpe., A. Chemistry in Canada 1983.351101.9-11. 13. (a1Berry. K. 0.; Sprenger, R. D. J. CollgeSci. Teaching 1972.2.12-14: (bl Powers, J. W.: Black, D. G. J. College Sci. Teaching 1976.5,171-172. 14. (a) Perkins, R. R.: Bennett, S.: Bowering, E.: Burke, J.; a i d , K.; Wall. D. Chamistrr J. Chemisfrr ondlndusrry 1980.730: (bl Perkino,R. R.:Tihbo,P.:Reid,K.:Dornsn. ond Indwlry 1981.571-572. 15. Reed, J. N.: Rotehfurd.J.: Strickland, D. Tefmhedron Letters 1988.29.5725-5128. 1985,106,L37-38. 16. Rayne~C~nham.G.W.:vanR~dd,M.:Burke.J.lnorg.Chim.A~~ff 17. Lord. T. R. J. Coilege Sci. Teaching 1988/89,18,174-177. 18. Purser, G. H.; Scull, S. D. J. Coilem Sci. Teaching 1989/90,19,2629,62. 19. (a) Harnsd, S., Ed. Peer Commentary on Pear Reuielu: A Case Study in Scientific Quality Control; Cambridge University: Cambridge, U.K. 1982; lbl Garfield. E. Es*ays of o n Informotion Scirnlht: 1986;ISI: Philadelphia, 1988: p 230-248. 20. Rawer Canham, G. W. Conodion Chemical News 1987.39181,9-12. 21. (a) Johnson. B. L. Improuing Collage and Univer~ityTeaching 1969, 17. 73-76: (b1 Gleaner, E. J. Intellect 1977,106,152-158. 22. Summerbell, R. K. J. Cham. Educ. 1354.31.365-368. 23. Hatiua,N.SchoolSei. Mothamatic8 1986:85,136144. 24. Christoplas,F.: valletutti, P.ImprouingCollegeand Uniueraity Taoching 1972,20(31, >dB
25. Kochen, M. J. Doc. 1987.43. M 4 . 26. Sindermann. C. J. Winning the Games Seienliaia P l w Plenum: New York, 1982. 27. Lsrt. A. M.; Raynor-Canham, G. W.: Webb. M. J.: Perkins. R. R, J. C d W Sd. Tpoehing 1984/85,14.53-57. 28. (a) Rayner-Canham, G. W.; Last.A. M.:vanRoade. M.:Perkins. R. R.Foundofions of Chemislry:Addison-Wesley: Reading, MA, 1983; lbl hyner-Canham, G. W. Foundotions of Chemistry in the Loborolorr;Addison-Wosley: Reading, MA. 1983. M. J.CollegeSci. Teaching 1985/86,15. 29. Webb. M.J.;Rayner-Canham,G.W.;Last,A. 44a453. 30. (a) Rayner-Canham G. W.: Dickie, W. J. Computers Moth. Sci. Teaching 1985/86.
148
Journal of Chemical Education
Lapf, A. M. J. College Sci. Teaching 1985/88,15,45-50. la) Perkins,R. R.J. Chhs, Edue. 1981.58.363; lb) Perkins,R.R. J.Ckm.Educ. 1981. 58,548. (el Parkina, R. R.; Ryan, E. Ch,?m l3Neu8 1983.5 (April); lbl Rayner Canham G. W.: Naidu, H. Sehaoi Sci. Re". 1986.67.543-545. Mills, J. L.:Hsmpton, M. D. Conodinn ChemicalNews, 1989,41(31. Abhyankar. S. B.: Reed, J. N. Cnnodion Chemical Nova 1987.3918) Perkins R.R.;Chau,F. J. Chem.Educ. 1982,59,981. Wobb,M. J.: Rawer-Canham,G. W. J.Cham. Edue 1982,59,1012 Rsvner-Csnham.G. W.:Kettlc. J.Educ. Chem,innress.
,....
Webb, M. J.; Rayno~Canham,G. W. Canodion ChemidNelua 1984,36(51,2&21. Rayner-Canham, G. W.; Layden, W. J. College Sci. Teaching 1988/89,18.330-333. la) Rawer-Canham, G. W.; Lsst, A. M. Chemisf~y-AFiM Coursc Addison-Wesley Csnada:Don MilkON. 1988: lbl Rawor-Canham.G. W.: Finher. P.:LeCoutpur,P.: h a p , R. ~ h ~ r n i ~ tSecond & ~ ~o;me; Addison-Wedw Canada: Don Milk ON. 1989. (a) Monaghan. P. Edue. Chem. 1987.24. 153-155; (b1 Monaghan. P. K.: Coyne, M. Edur. Chem. 1588,2J, 139-141. Rsyner-Canham. G. W. Sci. Teacher L985.52(31,23-25. (a) Webb. M. J. Sci. Toorher 1982,49(31.3%4@lbl Webb, M. J.; Lart. A. M.: RaperCanham.G. W. Sci. Teacher 1983.50(71.2630. Abhyankar, S. B Presented at the College Chemistry Canada canrerenee, Edmonton. Canada, 1986. Abhyankar, S. R. Presented a t the North American Chemical Congress. Toronto. Cansds, 1988. (a1 Rayner-Canham. G.W.; Frenette, H. Educ. Chem. 1985.22.176176: lbl RawerCsnhsm, G. W.: RaynerCanhsm, M. F. Sci. Teacher 1987,54111,1621. Rsuner-Canham.. G. W.:. Ravner-Canham. M. F. Am. J. Phva. 1989.57.89%902. &field. E. Currant ~ ~ ~ f1986. s n (19). f ~3-8. Garfield, E. Current Contents 1987, (181.3-6. Neufeld, A. H. Science 1986.234,11. Lae, C. 8. T.. Ed, hprouing College Teoehing: American Council on Education: Washington, DC. 1967: p 212.
