HOW ARE TEACHERS BEING TRAINED IN COLLEGE FOR TEACHING HIGH-SCHOOL CHEMISTRY? 11' CURRICULUM REQUIREMENTS IN THE VARIOUS STATES In the discussion of the first report of this committee,$ which was presented a t the St. Louis meeting of the American Chemical Society (April, 192S), Professor Frank Wade pointed out the wide discrepancy in the requirements for the training of chemistry teachers in the various states. It seemed desirable that this problem should be carefully studied. The committee has done this and submits the following results of their investigation. Requests were sent to the educational department of the forty-nine states and territories of the United States, asking for information concerning requirements for chemistry teachers in the public schools of each state. Replies have been received from forty-four states. Connecticut, Louisiana, Michigan, New Mexico, and South Carolina have not sent information. The departments in Alabama and Oklahoma are in the process of revising their requirements. Fourteena of the forty-four states have definite subject matter, other than in education, required for certification--such as eighteen hours in a major subject (chemistry) and ten hours in a minor subject, or, in other cases, thirty-six hours of science. The certificate is then granted for the special branch or branches of teaching. The remainder of the states (thirty) or nearly seventy per cent grant a blanket certificate which entitles the holder to teach any subject in the high schools of the state. Many of these states require a major and minor or a major but do not certify in that subject so that the teachers may teach any subject. This situation, in the opinion of the committee, is an extremely unsatisfactory one and calls for modification. At least twenty-three4 require practice teaching or successful teaching for a given period before a permanent certificate is issued. About ten require practice teaching before any certificate is granted. Twentyeight states require courses in education. In many cases, work in methods courses satisfies part of the education requirements although such work is not usually compulsory.
' Committee Report submitted to the Senate of Chemical Education at Columbus, Ohio, May 1, 1929. THISJOURNAL, 5,743-7 (June, 1928). Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Mississippi (beginning 1928-29). New Jersey, North Carolina (after 1931). North Dakota. Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Utah (as far as possible), Virginia, West Virginia. 'Arizona, California, Colorado, Delaware, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey. New York, Nmth Dakota, Oregon, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhood Island. South Dakota, Utah, Vermont.
VOL.6, NO. 6 COLLEGE TRAINING FOR TEACHING HIGH-SCHOOL CHEMISTRY
1157
The state department bulletins indicate that, in general, the requirements in educational subjects are much more carefully worked out and standardized than are the requirements in chemistry or other science. This constitutes a serious defect in the interest of effective teaching of chemistry. A desirable sequence of courses was discussed in the first report. The committee feels that the minimum requirement in chemistry subjects should be: General Chemistry Qualitative Analysis Quantitative Analysis Organic Chemistry Methods Course Total
5 hours* 5 hours* 5 hours' 3 hours* 2 hours* 20 hours
* Five hours weekly of recitation or its equivalent in' practice per semester is understood. In addition to the major courses listed above i t is highly desirable to include a course in physical chemistry and one in advanced inorganic chemistry. The minor subject should be, in all cases, some definitely related science such as physics, biology, or mathematics. The wide diversity in the quality of our instruction in high-school chemistry, in the opinion of the committee, is largely due to the lack of adequate requirements for certification of chemistry teachers in many of our states. It is hoped that this investigation may he of value in the process of improving this unsatisfactory situation. A. J. CURRIER, Chairmall HENRIETTA HAYDEN N. HENRYBLACK A. E. M c K ~ N E Y
THE PROFESSIONAL SPIRIT AMONG HIGH-SCHOOL CHEMISTRY TEACHERS. I P The problem of arousing a professional spirit among high-school teachers of chemistry might well begin a t the beginning; let only those teachers be selected for high-school cbemistry instruction who are primarily interested in cbemistry. This is a much easier task than trying to make an enthusiastic teacher of chemistry out of some one who has a minimum knowledge of chemistry-no matter how well acquainted with the method of teach'mg he or she may be. 1 Committee Report submitted to the Senate of Chemical Education at Columbus, Ohio, May 1, 1929. ' S e e THISJOURNAL, 5,747-9 (June, 1928).
