How the ACS Should Relate Melvin Greenstadt
Fairfax High School Los Angeles, California 90046
to High School Chemistry A personal view
The American Chemical Society recognizes that i t has a duty to high school chemistry and high school chemistry teachers. Commendably, it is trying to fulfill that ohligation. The existence of well-conceived teaching awards attests to this. Evidence of even more active involvement lies in the chemical education committees which have as part of their agendas the consideration of high school chemistry and its personnel. The work of these groups has had some beneficial impact on high school chemistry, hut much more remains to he done. In what follows I shall present my personal views as to how the Society might engender significant influence. Let me begin by defining some aspects of the function of high school science courses and teachers in the educational scheme of things. High school chemistry, physics and mathematics courses mark the beginning of the professional training of those who are going into careers in science or engineering. A comparable situation does not exist for trainees in most other professions. For example, future practitioners of law or business administration or psychology, to name just a few, usually do not take formal courses in those areas in high school. However, a future scientist or engineer takes chemistry, physics, and mathematics in his high school program. Frequently, these courses are recognized as being especially significant by giving the students advanced standing when they enter college. If the decision to go into science or engineering is made after the student has graduated from high school without having taken science or math courses, he is faced with the necessity of making u p the deficiencies by taking remedial courses in college. Many of these courses are simply equivalent to good high school programs. Focusing on our own subject, we can say that high school chemistry is part of the beginning of the professional training of a chemist or chemical engineer. If we accept this point, it immediately becomes evident that the high school chemistry teacher is an important memher of the team that produces new chemists and chemical engineers. In a sense, his may he the most critical role in the overall program, for he may he the most influential person in the student's decision-making process-whether or not to go into this field of endeavor a t all. There is another group of students with whom the high school teacher plays an important role-those who are not going into science or science-related callings. For them, the high school chemistry course may be their only experience in the physical sciences. These future voting citizens must have some measure of scientific literacy. Science has long since ceased to be an individual pursuit supported by its practitioners, or even a group activity supported by modest private donations. Modern science demands huge The 1973 ACS James Bryant Conant Award in High School Chemistry Teaching was presented to Melvin Greenstadt at the 165th Meeting of the ACS in Dallas in April of 1973. Dr. Greenstadt was one of the authors of the CHEM Study text. This paper is an adaptation of his address at the Chemical Education Divisional Dinner in August of 1973, during the 166th Meeting in Chicago.
financial resources, most of them supplied ultimately by the federal government. Thus, science requires the support of the general voting citizenry of the country. Some of the non-science-oriented students will ultimately he in key policy-making positions. Certainly, science requires friends among these nonscientists. This friendship is possible only if they understand something about science and especially what i t can do, what i t should not he expected to do and, perhaps most important, what i t should not he blamed for. If current governmental policies regarding the support of science, and public apathy toward those policies, are any criteria, i t can he concluded that the present understanding of the scientific enterprise leaves much to he desired. Chemistry's role will become ever broader as environmental science develops-as we begin to recognize and face the problems involved in combatting pollution and adopting policies of conservation, and as we seek new sources of energy. The high school chemistry teacher has the critical role of negating the idea that chemistry and the other sciences are irrelevant and that they have ceased to provide opportunities for a challenging, meaningful, satisfying life's work. The high school chemistry teacher is chekistry's good-will ambassador to the next generation of scientists and nonscientists alike. From all this, I hope that you conclude, as I do, that high school chemistry teachers are very important people, performing a sensitive function in our scheme of things. On the other hand, however, you may think that I am assigning them an undue amount of importance and influence. Perhaps this would be so if I were talking of only a few, or a few hundred, or even a few thousand individuals. But this is not the case. Some data provided by the U.S. Office of Education tell how many are involved. The register maintained by the National Science Teachers Association listed the names of 22,216 individuals who were teaching a t least one high school chemistry course in 1971-72. They estimate their coverage was 78%, making the number of such teachers in the country that year to he about 28,500. This is a figure equal to more than 25% of the current membership of the American Chemical Society. I have alluded to two functions performed by high school chemistry teachers-providing the initial stage of the professional training of chemists and bringing nonscientists to some level of scientific literacy. I believe this leads to the conclusion that high school chemistry teachers are members of the chemical profession. As such, the ACS has an obligation to them, much as i t has to other memhers of the profession. Let us consider what the Society might he able to do for them. The following data, again provided by the Office of Education, concern the qualifications of the teachers. They are the result of a National Science Foundation survey, conducted in 1969-70, using a sample of 525 people who were teaching chemistry. Of these, 36, or about I%, had less than a bachelor's degree of any kind. A group of 165, or 31.490, had a hachelor's or higher degree in chemistry; 57 of the "higher deVolume 51, Number 9. September 1974 / 565
gee" individuals, about 11% of the entire sample, had a master's demee in chemistry, and two had doctorates. The remaining 324, or 61.7%of the sample, had a bachelor's or higher degree in another field. Of the 525 people in the sample, 401 (76.4%)were certified for teaching chemistry and 322 (61.3%) taught chemistry as their major assignment. If we assume, perhaps arbitrarily, that the minimum desirable preparation should be a bachelor's degree in chemistry, some discrepancies become evident, for only 31.4% of the sample had a t least the minimum preparation while 76.4% were certified to teach chemistry and 61.3%actually were doing so as their major assignment. In brief, the data show that the chief source of high school chemistry teachers is not chemistry majors. This situation is a concomitant of the general condition of education in the country. Therefore, we cannot expect the regular educational agencies to be able to alleviate i t in the foreseeable future. So, we turn to the ACS. What can the Society do? Let us postpone the answer to that question temporarily, in order to put first things first. Whatever the Society is going to do, it will first have to make contact with the teachers, to bring them into the fold somehow, much as a teacher gathers his students into a circle of influence. How can this be accomplished? Can the ACS take high school chemistry teachers in as regular members? Under the present requirements of training and chemical experience, the answer in most cases is no. Moreover, the dues would be prohibitive. I was a member for some years. The only thing I got for my membership was C & E News. The technical iournals were not suited to my needs or interests. I paid $i6 annually just to support the Society. When the dues were increased to $25 the measure of my devotion was exceeded and I dropped out. Even C & E News was of onlv limited interest to me. Attendance at conventions is, in general, impossible for high school teachers. There is no provision for release from teaching duties, and there are no funds to pay expenses. Even if high school teachers could attend conventions, a t present there is very little in the convention programs to induce them to do so. Most teachers are not involved in research and are not sufficiently specialized to find the proceedings of interest. What I have said concerning membership in the Society and attendance a t its conventions is, in general, applicable also to the Division of Chemical Education and its programs. I dropped my own membership in the Division even before I terminated my connection with the Society, because I was getting nothing out of being a member. Evervthine I have iust said mav sound as though I am arguing aga&st high Bchool teach& being made members of the Societv and the Division of Chemical Education. This is not the case. I have merely been describing how the present membership qualifications preclude their membership and how present programs are unavailable and unattractive to them. Actually, I strongly believe that membership would be most desirable. It would make high school teachers feel themselves a part of the chemical profession. The status thus afforded them might very well motivate and inspire them to improve their professional qualifications. Their self-image would he hound to improve. This is not to imply that they feel like second-class citizens. However, it safely can be said that there is still room for them to be looking upward. It is difficult to categorize the intangible benefits that would accrue from the recognition afforded by membership in the ACS. At least i t would constitute recognition as members of the chemical profession, over and above whatever recognition they already have as members of the teaching profession. I suggest that a special membership category be created for high school teachers. Some would be able to meet the Society's present membership qualifications. Also eligible 566
/ Journal of Chemical Education
should be those whose major teaching assignment is chemistry, regardless of their academic preparation. Once i t bas been decided that they will be offered membership, a campaign will he necessary to get them to join. Benefits notwithstanding, i t will be necessary to overcome inertia and initial lack of interest on the part of some. Very important will b e a special low rate of dues. Now, what can the Society offer the teachers? I have already indicated the reasons why national conventionsregional meetings can be included, as well-are unsuitable. Then what is there? There are two possible avenues of effective contact. One is printed materials, the other is programs a t the local section level. Let us consider literature first. At present, there are two journals in the area of chemical education. One is Chemistry. This is an excellent periodical for high school students and there is some material in i t which is interesting and useful to teachers. However, i t is not designed to provide significant strengthening of the background of a poorly-prepared teacher. The other periodical is the Journal of Chemical Education. Some of the regular features of the J o u m l are of interest and usefulness to high school teachers and some of the articles are within the scope of the better-prepared members of the group. However, the majority of the articles are too technical for most high school teachers and the laboratory programs are far too sophisticated to be applicable to high school courses. The Journal is predominantly suited to college teachers. I t is not designed (nor should it be expected to be) to meet the full spectrum of needs of an "average" high school chemistry teacher. To fill the breech, I suggest that the Society and its Division of Chemical Education consider the publication of two kinds of materials. One should he a series of monographs designed specifically to teach chemistry to those who have had little, if any, formal preparation and to keep up-to-date those whose training was far enough in the past to he a t least partially obsolete. Such a series of monographs is being published in England, initially under the sponsorship of the Royal Institute of Chemistry and presently by the Chemical Society. These monographs are better suited to English chemistry teachers than they are to our own, for their teachers, in general, start with better preparation than do ours. We need some publications a t a more elementary level than the English monographs; these can then he followed by more advanced materials. The second type of written material should be articles and experiments aimed specifically at high school chemistry teachers and courses. These should have a substantial amount of space in the Journal allotted to them. I shall have a little more to say about the orientation and content of written materials a bit later. At this time, I should like to suggest that i t might be a good idea to partially subsidize printed materials so that cost will not be a prohibitive factor for the teachers. Admittedly, this would be an unusual practice, since subsidies generally are not provided for materials to improve or maintain the qualifications of teachers in other subject fields. However, it is probable that in no other field is there as widespread a need to bring teachers up to and maintain them a t standard qualification as there is in the rapidly changing and growing sciences. At this point, it is appropriate to mention that the problem of rendering assistance to teachers is a two-way street. Teachers should make it their business to communicate their needs to the Journal and to specify what they would like to see published. Furthermore, they should submit for publication any material which they may consider useful to their colleagues. The second possible avenue of effective contact between the Society and teachers is programs a t the local section
level. Many teachers could participate in these without having to face the problems of release time and prohibitive expense. Some local sections are conducting useful programs for teachers, hut i t is safe to say that there is room for considerable enhancement and spreading of this practice. I suggest that the Society or the Division of Chemical Education take a leadership role in helping local sections design ongoing programs for high school teachers. The services of college instructors and industrial chemists might he enlisted to present organized instructional programs for the teachers. These could complement and supplement the printed materials I recommended earlier. This is not the place to list specific content for the printed materials or for the instructional programs. I do want to point out, however, that most high school teachers are conscientious and some are actually dedicated to what they are doing. They want to feel they are authoritative in what they are teaching. They teach chemistry a t an elementary level, hut they want to he sure that it is good chemistry, in tune with the present state of knowledge of the science. This leads me to a shift of the discussion from high school chemistry teachers to high school chemistry itself. As is well-known to chemical educators, there was a radical change introduced into the teaching of the subject as we entered the 1960's. Prior to 1960, the textbooks, and thus the courses, were fact-oriented and introduced very little of the theory or structure of chemistry. They did not reveal the nature of the science nor its methodology. In the opinion of some influential chemists, this added up to a pretty deadly program. As a result, the CBA and CHEM Study programs were brought into being. Let i t be noted that the ACS was involved in the hirth process of both programs. Of the two new courses, the CHEM Study was by far the more widely adopted. It also happens to he the one I know more about and, now that it has been used for a considerable number of years, I feel justified in claiming for i t one major accomplishment. It succeeded to a significant degree in introducing into high school chemistry those features, stated above, which were lacking in the traditional courses. Some aspects of the CHEM Study program were controversial. Unquestionably, there were deficiencies in i t and some difficulties in teaching it. However, the overall effect was definitely on the plus side. Clearly, a breath of fresh air was introduced into high school chemistry by this program. In my opinion, the most important long-term benefit of CHEM Study has been the effect i t has had on the texts which have been published since its advent. These latter have, to varying degrees, retained the better aspects of the traditional texts and incorporated with them the innwative features of CHEM Study. Thus, authors have tended to eliminate the more controversial aspects of CHEM Study in producing less revolutionary texts which yet are a distinct improvement over the pre-1960 breed. Now, where does the ACS enter into all this? After the Society provided the initial impetus which resulted in the hirth of CHEM Study, the financial support for the program was provided by the National Science Foundation. Further, in the early years of the program thousands of teachers were given special training to teach it, also under the sponsorship of the NSF. However, this organization has been severely curtailed in recent years. It is unlikely that in the foreseeable future i t will he in a position to subsidize another program such as CHEM Study. In time, CHEM Study and the commercial texts patterned on i t will be outdated. I suggest that the ACS take on the role formerly filled by the NSF. A standing committee of high school and college teachers should he formed for the purpose of continuously scrutinizing course
materials and the trends of high school chemistry courses. At such time as they deem i t necessary, a project similar to CHEM Study should be initiated, to open a fresh new path. I believe that there already exists a challenge for the designers of courses and the writers of texts. To my mind, the chemistry course should provide an esthetic experience for the students. Moreover, it should he the highest order of esthetic experience. This requires some elahoration. Art and music provide esthetic experience of a sensual and, sometimes, spiritual or emotional nature. I think esthetic experience of an intellectual nature is higher than the others. Certainly, it is more difficult to come by. When i t is achieved, the others probably accompany i t to some degree. There is opportunity for intellectual esthetic experience in chemistry. An outstanding example lies in the elegance of the relationship between the Periodic Table, obtained as a result of experimental observations, and the model of the atom, obtained by purely theoretical derivation. In response to the recommendations of the Snowmass Conference, the Division of Chemical Education developed a proposal for a new high school chemistry curriculum that would have incorporated some of the features mentioned above. Unfortunately, in spite of the Division's efforts, the proposal was not funded. At this writing, I do not know of a single text which truly captures the beauty inherent in chemistry or, a t least, makes i t sufficiently explicit so that a teacher may bring a t least some of his students to experience it. Teachers must themselves derive esthetic pleasure from chemistry before they can lead their students tn.,experience the same reactions. This requires exposure LJ a different treatment of the subject than the customary one. I said earlier that I would have a few comments to make about the orientation and content of written materials sponsored by the Society. I was referring in part to the esthetic factor just mentioned. I would like to see some gifted writers introducing that element into the materials they produce for teachers. Then, perhaps, some students also ultimately will have an esthetic experience in their chemistry course. Now, finally, one more comment on content. I have said that one of the functions of the chemistry course was to bring students to some degree of scientific literacy. Literally millions of today's citizens have taken some chemistry. Why aren't they scientifically literate? Obviously, today's courses do not result in scientific literacy. The reason is that the elements of such literacy are not spelled out in the course and most people do not take enough science to acquire it in an incidental fashion. Now, what would he wrong with introducing some of the sociology of science into chemistry courses? In addition to chemical principles themselves, courses need to teach about the expanding role of chemistry in the areas of todav's critical uroblems-pollution control and reversal, conservation, energy, medicine, agriculture, and so forth. Examples should he ziven of discoveries in "pure" science which initially had no "practical" value, but which ultimately found application in important, even vital, technology. If for no other reason than this, the necessity for supporting basic research is made evident. More broadly, there should he delineation of the conditions under which science flourishes, the economic and political factors related to its development, and the trends it pursues in response to the ambient socio-politico-economic climate. Since high school teachers are not themselves experts in the sociology of science, all of this material would have to he presented in the ACS-sponsored literature in such way that i t could be imparted to students, thus affording them an opportunity to acquire a measure of scientific literacy. Volume 51, Number 9. September 1974 / 567
To compensate in part for the length of this article, I shall make my summary brief. At this time, high school chemistry teachers are professionals without a professional affiliation and, to a great extent, professionals with inadequate preparation to practice their profession effectively.
568
/ Journal of Chemical Education
Further, the subject matter of their discipline requires broadening of its scope and an agency for keeping it continually up-to-date. Respectfully, I charge the American Chemical Society with the responsibility of taking steps toward the correction of these conditions.
