REFORM IN THE CHEMISTRY CURRICULUM
The purpose of this paper is to emphasize the desirability of certain changes in the college curriculum which would make for more independent work by undergraduate students in chemistry. In order to render more than a mere lip service to a sentiment which would be acceded to in principle by nearly all teachers of chemistry, the author suggests a concrete plan for the reorganization of the chemistry curriculum so as to better secure the development of the intellectual initiative and independence of the student. Essentially, the plan consists of the insertion of autonomous or tutorial courses into the curriculum, to replace all except four fundamental present-style courses in general, analytical, organic, and physical chemistry. This paper is not a t all concerned with the development of cultural or pandemic courses in general chemistry; the author is concerning himself only with the preparation of the student who intends to make chemistry his life-work. There are two differences between the scientist and the m a n in the street. One difference lies in the fact that the scientist has certain tools, consisting of a method and mathematics, for delving into the secrets of nature and describing her laws. The other, and one fully as important, is contained in the fact that the successful scientist has largely overcome his intellectual inertia. Each one of us ig possessed by this inertia which takes the form of a mental timidity-a fear to launch out into the dark of a new problem. If an instructor or some other guide will lead the way, we follow gladly and glibly-hence the apparent success of lecture courses in college. But our intellectual inertia remains, not one whit abated, to deter us from attacking wholeheartedly and with success the problems which we shall need to meet without guide service. The only way to overcome this inertia is to tread the paths of scientific investigation courageously alone until we gain confidence in ourselves. I t should be just as much the function of the college chemistry curriculum to provide means for the student to overcome his intellectual inertia, as to provide him with the tools of the chemist. If we consider the development of the chemistry curriculum during the past two or three decades, we find a planless expansion which has been necessitated by the growth of the field of chemistry. From a field which was adequately covered by four college courses-general, analytical, organic, and physical chemistry-the science of chemistry has expanded over hitherto undiscovered territory as well as over territory which had previously been allotted to other sciences, until now it covers such an area that no one man could hope to survey it all. The chemistry curriculum,
V04. 6. NO.6
REFORM IN THE CHEMISTRY CURRICULUM
1127
originally a simple instrument which satisfactorily surveyed the entire field in four years, has been endowed with a multitude of cumbersome additions in the form of specialized courses which make it an unwieldy thing, unable t o perform the impossible function of giving the student a complete survey of the entire field, and unfit to perform the essential present-day function of preparing the student for intelligent specialization in some one branch of the science. When one reads the pages devoted to the chemistry curriculum in almost any college catalog today, he finds, in addition to the four courses which I have suggested as fundamental, from five to twenty-five undergraduate courses of a special nature, each one of which is an extension or amplification of material which has been introduced in the fundamental courses. At their best these special courses represent individnar points of view with which the student will do well to become acquainted. But usually they represent impersonal resumes of the important work in various fields which the student is expected to copy in his notebook and to reproduce upon demand. All the evils of the lecture system are found in these courses; there is practically no encouragement for the student to develop the ability to survey a field and to form an independent judgment. The results of this type of education for those who continue to work in chemistry are painfully evident to teachers in graduate schools and to the heads of industrial laboratories. What these men wish to see in the oncoming generation of chemists is the ability to attack singlehandedly and to master independently a phase of work,which is strange and new; what they find is too often a parrot-like knowledge of the subjects which the young chemist had in college, and a pitiable helplessness before the new problems he is called upon to face. College training has not succeeded in freeing him of his intellectual inertia. Although I do not here advocate the adoption of the German university system, I see as one of its advantages the fact that there are so few specialized courses, while so much of the student's time is spent in individual work. After about three years in the university, a student of chemistry is very much on his own. His reading and his independent experimental work take up most of his time. As a means of helping the young chemist to overcome the mental inertia which will hold him back, whether he goes into graduate work or into an industrial laboratory, as a means of better preparing him for turning his hand to any problem of chemistry with which he might find himself concerned, I believe in a reorganization of the curriculum on the basis of the thesis that the student must accept the responsibility of teaching himself. The student must do his own learning. Not only is this a means of overcoming one's intellectual inertia; it is also a recognition of a fact which each one of us appreciates more profoundly as his experience grows-
one knows only so much as he has lived. Facts become a part of us not when they are sprinkled over us from the lecturer's desk, but only when we jump into them and wallow around in them. The details of the kind of a course which I believe would accomplish the desired end and which I have called a tutorial course are as follows: the course should occupy a third or a fourth of the student's time for a t least a year; it should consist of a study, either theoretical or experimental, of some relatively specialized branch of chemistry; the student, if doing theoretical work, should write.a paper once in two weeks and read it to his instructor (tutor) at a regularly scheduled conference hour; if doing experimental work the student should make some sort of report a t the conference hour; the work should be conducted by the student in such a way as to make use of his teacher as an adviser, not as a fbuntain of knowledge. It will be seen a t once that this course diiers little from the honors course to be found in a number of colleges, or from the thesis work required of senior students in some other schools. If all chemistry departments offered honors work or required theses, there would not be the crying need which now exists for reform of the chemistry curriculum. But theses are required of chemistry students in few colleges, and in a number of schools that have attempted to introduce the honors course idea the departments of chemistry have not cooperated wholeheartedly. Further, the author's suggestion goes beyond the honors scheme in that the tutorial work is to be required of all students who specialize in chemistry. Below is given, as a concrete example, p q t of the college catalog devoted to the chemistry curriculum of a department with three teachers, as the author would like to see it. Curricrdum for students intending to major in chemistry. A major consists of a t least 30 semester hours' work, including a year of general chemistry, a t least a half year each of analytical, organic, and physical chemistry, and a t least a year's work in tutorial courses. GENERALCHEM~STRY-~ hours: 3 hours lecture and quiz, two laboratory periods per week. Through the year. Mr. A. ANALYTICALC H E M I S T R Yhours: ~ 1 hour lecture, two laboratory periods per week. Through the year. Mr. B. ORGANIC C R E M I S T R Y hours: ~ 2 hours lecture, two laboratory periods per week. Through the year. Mr. C. P n u s ~ cC r ~~ E M I S T R hours: Y~ 2 hours lecture, two laboratory periods per week. Through the year. Mr. A. TUTORIAL COURSES-5 hours. Each course continues a half-year. Open t o juniors and seniors who satisfy the instructor that they are prepared t o undertake the courses chosen.
MR. A. TheoreticaGPhase Rule, Atomic Structure, Crystal Structure, Thermodynamics, Photachemistry. Catalysis, History of Chemistry, Hydrogen-Ion Determination.
VOL. 0,NO. 6
Rs~onaaI N THE CHEMISTRY CURRICU~~UM
Erperimentnl-Themochemistry.
1129
Colloids, Hydrogen-Ion Determination.
MR. B. TheoreticaGSpecis.1 Problems in Industrial Chemistry. Erperimentol-Water Analysis, Iron and Steel Analysis, Fertilizer and Soil Analysis, Gas Analysis, Inorganic Preparations, Fuel Chemistry. MR.C. T&heorelicdStereochemistry, Physiological Chemistry, Biochemistry. Ezperimental-Organic Qualitative Analysis, Organic Quantitative Analysis, Dye Chemistry, Petroleum Chemistry, Food Products, Physiological Chemistry.
Certain questions which immediately arise as a result of the perusal of this scheme may be briefly answered. Will not the instructor be overburdened? In a school of 500-1500 students, with three or four members of the department, there will not be more than five or six chemistry majors per instructor from any one college class. Each man would have a halfdozen students to meet individually once in two weeks, and in addition he would have to keep himself in a position to advise the student concerning the next steps in the student's work. But, on the other hand, the teacher would be freed from the one or two special courses which he gives under the present system. In a large institution, with a great many students of chemistry, the professors will be so busy with graduate students that they can spare little time for personal advisership to undergraduates. Here the work of advising the undergraduates would have to he taken over largely by the younger instructors. Wi!l not the student's progress he very slow in a subject which he attacks with so little guidance? To he sure his progress will be slow, but he will be $reparing himself to attack more efficiently his next problem, and he will be learning well what he does learn. Why require the student to take even the so-called "fundamental" courses? There is a certain discipline and a certain language of chemistry which must be mastered by every chemist before he can make himself intelligible to other chemists, and before he can understand them. It is primarily to furnish this common ground of understanding that communal courses in the "fundamentals" should be given. Why require only a half-year of analytical, organic, and physical chemistry? To a student who is interested primarily, for example, in physical chemistry, a half-year's work in each of organic and analytical chemistry should provide a sufficient vocabulary. He should study physical chemistry for a year, preferably as a junior, and thus have his senior year for tutorial courses. Analogously, one interested in analytical or organic chemistry may devote only a halfyear to each of the two courses in which he is not particularly interested.
