The Place of History in the Teaching of Chemistry
Compiled by J. Dudley Herron from reports by Erwin Boschmann, William Kessel, Jerrold Lokensgard and Dave Maclnnes Are chemistry teachers interested in using history in teaching their subject? Based on the animated conversation among the thirty or so participants a t the History of Chemistry "Happening" (4) on Wednesday afternoon, one would certainly think so. They were talking about what to teach, when to teach it, and how as they browsed through the photo albums, tape recordings, pictures, reprints, "X-rated" books, and other paraphernalia found in the booth.
teaching the history of chemistry and including a few historical anecdotes in courses to liven things up. The presenters were careful to make this distinction a i d 2 would he a good idea for us to do the same. None of the presenters seemed to object to using historical events to spice up an otherwise unappetizing menu of chemical principles hut they were quick to point out the daneers. If one is &ing to use historical anecdotes, they should he accurate and they should truly illustrate the point being made This isn't always easy. When anecdotes are taken out of context and used to illustrate a point in a modern course, their historical perspective is lost and the result can be misleading. How many of us realize, for example, that Boyle did not recognize the relationship in his experimental data that now bears his name until someone else pointed it out? Or that he could scarcely he expected to arrive a t the constancy of the P V product when the concept of P was not formulated? In many cases it is difficult to capture the flavor of a historical period because doing so would require the introduction of a great deal of information that has little utility today. In order to appreciate the chemical struggles of the past, one needs to understand the symbolic language that was used to '
T h e interest in hist,ory was evident from the discussion which foilowed the papers in the session on the use of history in the teaching of chemistry as well as in the activity a t the "Happening" booth. Why all the interest? Echoing throughout the papers on the use of history was the theme introduced by Ihde in his paper, "Chemistry is a Human Enterprise" (8). Chemistry is generally taught as a mental exercise with little relation to the past or our daily lives. Students are turned off hv this emphasis on science as a mental exercise and a major value of history is to show students that chemistry was created by human beings with all attendent foibles. Chemistry did not develop in the linear, loeical stvle of the modern, introductory text. History, with itsemphasis on people and society, canpersonalize &d humanize chemistrv to make it more real to our students. By ignoring the history of chemistry, we run the risk of furthering student misconceptions of chemistry as rigid, unfeeling, and always correct. If history can do these wonderful things, then why aren't u8eall including it in our courses' Ignorance, it would seem, i i not the only explanariun. Brush pointed out that rhemiral education is Driiarilv oriented toward the trainine. of professional chemists, medical doctors, engineers, and others interested in the a~olicationof chemical nrincioles ( 2 ) .It is taught for its practkal value. When an attempt is made to incor~oratehistorv in a eeneral course, students are unlikely to I& it i c r i o u s l < ~ h e vknow that the p a n t of thecourse& chuminrr, and not the historical asides. Compoundiny the problem;^ a point made by Bent in his engaging remarks ahout the teaching of history ( I ) . People don't seem to he very interested in history until they have a personal history; i.e., until they are older than most high school and beginning college students. (Do you remember how you viewed history a t that age? I do and I am convinced that Bent is correct!) We probably need to make a clear distinction between
I
.d
r-
*.,
d r s m h r t h e chem~calnhenomena of the aee: to use modern formulas, equations, and names implies the preexistence of the verv ideas that the chemists of that veriod were stneeline to produce. But who wants to take the time to teach modern students an archaic svmholism so that thev can understand that struggle? We face additional vrohlems when we trv to test students over history. Names and dates are trivial.and synthesis of historical ideas in an essav (not essavquestions) would require a kind of intellectual effort that doesn't fit the pattern of examination normallv used in real chemistry courses. Last, but not least, reaching histor). demands a consrientious, enthusiaqric individual who feels cnmfortable with this approach. Putting history into texts will not get it taught. Perhaps there was an element of self-preservation in the suggestion made by several of the speakers [Holmes (71, for example] that, to be done properly, history should be taught as history in separate courses taught by chemical historians. Even so, their arguments were sufficiently compelling that their suzeestions toward that end should not he ianored. Brush recommended that we influence the hiring of historians in our schools. that we uree " NSF to reinstitute summer institute programs and include institutes in the history of chemistry, that we publish an annual review of articles on the ~~~
~
~
w
.
uv
Volome 54, Number 1, January 1977 / 15
history nf chemistry in this Journal, and that we work through the ACS to establish a center on the historv of chemistrv to preserve materials needed to write the histo& of 20th century chemistrv as well as collect and disseminate materials on chemicaihistory. Will these things take place? Guedon seems somewhat skeptical (6). He boints out that pressures that influence curricula in chemistry come primarily from competition between teaching institutionsand demands by institutions consuming chemists. The history of science is in a buyer's market and the historians are the sellers. His point may be made more pointedly with this question: If the faculty in your department is faced with the choice of buying a new nmr or mini-computer or hiring a warm-blooded, breathing historian to teach the historv of chemistrv. .. where will the monev.eo? If your answer to that last question is the same as mine, we seem to he back to a consideration of how we can incornorate some history into standard courses taught by standard chemists without making a sorry mess of things. We should all he aware that there are a number of excellent references available for those of us who have never had an opportunity to study the history of our subject (and, incidently, probably know more incorrect and misleading anecdotes than we know historical facts). Ihde passed out a bibliography which he would probably share with others. In addition, DeSieno (3) called attention to the case histories developed several years ago hy Leo Klopfer. Although more materials of this kind are needed, the ones that are already available could provide a start. White presented a poster paper which provides an idea that could be used by others (11). He presented a time line, drawing parallels between significant events in the development~ of chemistrv since ~ ~ ~1770 ~and those events in the history of the USA that &e contemporary or of similar developmen&l significance. Until the aura of the bicentennial disappears, this approach might add a great deal. Even then, the basic idea of using events familiar to students, whether from American history or elsewhere, to provide a framework in which to dismake the subject .nlav the develooment of chemistry,. might more relevant, especially for some non-majors. In summary, this reporter left the Conference convinced that the history of chemistry has important contributions to make to the education of chemists and non-chemists alike, that tnt. ~ncluaion01 historical anwdotcs in a standard course m n make rhe nnlrsr more inwrerinr and rele\.ant-especially for non-science st,udents-but that such a treatment can never achieve many of the important objectives of teaching history, that separate courses in the history of chemistry taught by historians as history are desirable but unlikely to be offered in most institutions. and that the remark made hy Bent in a different context an'd quoted by Haight in the final address of the conference is especially applicable in this area. ~
~
"You can't win hut you can improve." 16 / Journal of Chemical Education
. . .Hen?
Rent
Annotated Bibliography (1) Bent. Henrv A.. Uses of Historv in Understandineand Encoding of Experience. A P a r t i a l View: Science, Con-Science. a n d Conscience. Denartment of Chemistry, North Carolina State uhive;sity, Raleigh, NC 27607. Very provocative paper which should he heard or at least read. Shows how a modern course, which moves from ideas to fact, distorts science, which moves from facts to ideas. (2) Brush, Stephen G., Why Chemistry Needs History, Committee on History and Philosophy of Science, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742. Cbrnrnents on the neglected state of the history of chemistry (not on teaching) and makes suggestions for making things better. (3) DeSieno, Robert P., T h e Uses of History i n Teaching Chemistry: Commentary 11,Department of Chemistry, Westminster College, New Wilmington, PA 16142. (4) Fine, Leonard W., T h e Uses of History i n Teaching Chemistry: An Information Exchange a n d Workshop, Department of Chemistry, Housatonic Community College, Bridgeport, C T 06608 (5) Goldberg, Stanley, Teach What to Whom? By Whom? Why? Department of Natural Sciences, Hampshire College, Amherst, MA 01002 (6) Guedon. Jean-Claude. T h e Uses of Historv i n Teaching Chemistry: c o m m e n t a r y I, Institut d'histoire et de Sociopolitique des Sciences Universite' de Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada (7) Holmes, Frederic L.. Strategies for Teachine Historv e of Chemistry, ~ e p a r t m e n t o fist tor^ of ~ e d i c i n an2 Science, Health Sciences Center, The University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario N6A 5C1, Canada Holmesargues in his paper that history should be taught as a separate subject and not incorporated into standard courses. He tempered his remarks slightly in the presentation. (8) Ihde, Aaron, Introduction: Chemistry is a H u m a n Enternrise. Denartment of Chemistrv. Universitv ~"of ~isc cons in- adi is on, Madison, WI 53766 (9) Ramsav. 0 . Bertrand. T h e Uses of Historv i n Teaching ~ k e m i s t r y :c o m m e n t a r y 111, ~ e p a r t m e n tof Chemistry, Eastern Michigan University, Ypsilanti, MI 48197. Remarks focus on the value of history in standard courses. (10) Schwartz, A. Truman, T h e Uses of History in Teachi n g Chemistry: Commentary IV, Department of Chemistry, Macalester College, Saint Paul, MN 55105. Provocative remarks related to the questions of whether the history of chemistry should be taught and, if so, how. (11) White, J. Edmund, Chemistry a n d t h e USA: T w o Centuries i n Parallel. Department of Chemistry, Southern Illinois University, Edwardsville, IL 62026 Describes a technique for placing chemical events in historical context. v
~
~
~
~
