International Chemical Education
Reports of the Symposium: Educational Technology
in the Teaching of Chemistry Report of the National Representative-IUPAC
Committee on Teaching of Chemistry
Forty national representatives to the IUPAC Committee on the teaching of chemistry form an international information network for chemical education. I t isn't a perfect network principally because no one individual can adequately represent t o the rest of the world the chemical education of his nation. Nor can one individual, after attending an international conference on chemical education, adequately convey the substance of that meeting to his fellow chemical educators who did not attend. In 1973 1attended and "reoresented" the US. a t the International Conmess on Imorovement of Chemical Educatmn in \\'roclaw. I'oIand I reported my prdesionnl and cmorionnl reactiuns to that experience ~n rhzc Jour,toll. The most important imwfir ior me, and I heliwe for all whoattended, was the curdial, mformal interartam with chemwts f n m other countries. That cannot be transmitted in a suhjcctiw repurr suehas mine. Nor can i t be runveyed through the ob~crtivr official report2. September 647,1975 in Madrid, Spain. I attended and "represented" the US. a t the international symposium "Educational Technology in the Teaching of Chemistry."3 My specific responsibility was to report on educational technology in teaching chemistry in the U S . My opening remarks were a disclaimer. ~~~
-.
~~~~~~
,
"The USA has an educational enterprise so massive, complexand diverse that no person, organization or government agency can be its spokesman. This situation is exacerbated by the high degree of independence each educational unit has regarding its programs. There are probably two thousand departments of chemistry in the nation's colleges and universities. In most of these, educational technology is used to some extent. In tens of thousands of secondsrysehool chemistry classrooms some forms of educational technology are employed t o some extent. A substantial fraction of the faculty involved in secondary school'and tertiary school chemical education are trying to improve, improvise or innovate with educational technology. In short, this report can do no more than provide a general status, plus one or two specific examples of educational technology." The examples chosen were somewhat unconventional. One was the Self Paced Learning Units of Evergreen State College, Olympia, Washington, and the other Topic Aids-75 published jointly by the American Chemical Society and Texas A & M University. I arranged t o share time allotted t o the USA with Dr. Moses Passer, Head, Department of Educational Activities of the ACS. Mike told of the Society's excellent program of audioeourses, film courses, and other continuing education programs using media. The U S . was represented through invited lectures by Dr. W. T. Lippin'cott, who traced the development of tools for educational technology in cfiemical education in the U S . over the past decade, and by Dr. J. A. Young, who discussed programmed instruction as an alternative to computer assisted instruction. Below are two short Daoers which will communicate the essence of the "Madrid Svmoosium." The vaoer -~~ . . . . hv . Dr. Robert , Hrastrd summnrized highiuhtsof thes\mposium.'l'h~paper by Dr. Khm Haupvesthr perspertivrofn natlvecf lndrn *rhu reeelved his I'h n in the [IS,gaincd inrernatiunal dist~nctiunfor research and chcmrcal educntron wh:k a prc,tera,r in India, and who is drdiwted I < , turrhrrmp. the cause of international chemical wlurarron through hls u o r k wilh I l ' P 4 C 8s Chairman of the Committee on the Teaching of Chemistry,
.~
William B. Cook Colorado State University Fort Collins, 80521
Volume 53. Number 5. May 1976 1 295
