opportunitie~in continuing education
edited by: RAYMONDD. BANGS Roseiie Park High School and Marblehead ETHYL Senior L.High SCHULTZ school
The 1982 Dreyfus Institute for High School Chemistry Teachers: A Retrospective Judith Himes The Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation, Post Office Box 642, Princeton, NJ 08540
Editor's Note: The pages of THEJOURNALhave carried their share of articles and opinions reflecting the deep concern of chemical educators about the problems in pre-college chemical education. The anicie that follows summarizes the planning and implementationof me first Camille and Henry Dreyfus institute, a private initiative to suppon high schwi chemistv teachers, improve the high school chemistry cunicuium, and draw more students to the field of chemistry A second institute is scheduled for summer 1983. We hope the participants find this as rewarding as the first.
In the spring of 1982, there was consensus among scientists, educators, and policy makers that a crisis existed in pre-college science and mathematics education. Respected biologist, Lewis Thomas, writing in the New York Times Magazine, asserted, "Everyone seems to agree that there is something wrong with the way science is heing-taught . these days. But no one is at all clear about when i t went wrong or whet is to be done about it." Committees, commissions, and studies were called into heing, but there seemed little prospect of imminent action. One new initiative was on the horizon. however. and its primary purpose was to improve the teaching of secondary school chemistry. For almost a year, the staff of The Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation, with financial support from the Camille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation, had been working with science educators to lay the groundwork and to identifv the facultv and ~articioantsfor a summer institute on high school chemistry. Planning The objectives of the Institute were straightforward: to reinvigorate a group of teachers who would, therefore, increase
student interest in chemistry, to produce new and relevant curricular material for integration into exlsting chemistry courses, and to forge a network of master teachers who would serve as catalysts for renewal and improvement of teaching m their geographic regions. The program would involve 50 high school teachers in four weeks of intensive work on three content areas covered in the general high school chemistry course and on methods for integrating this material into classroom teaching. The role and ~ l . ~ e t ~ f ~ n i i r u ~ u m lwould ) u t e r sh e s t r c s i ~ dthruughuur the Initilutt.. Although tbculiy I r m cdleae; and wli\.~~rsitieu would guide the work, emphasis was to be on participant-led experimentation and demonstration. At the end of four weeks, the participants, working with the faculty, would draft at least three modules of curricular material for use in their courses. 474
Journal of Chemical Education
Chrmijtj who had hem 110th L)reyiusl'eacher S;hol;tr.; ;~nd \Voudrua \Vilson Fc.lluu,swere iniurmed in mid-lbXI d f t h e plans for the Institute and were asked to help identify as director someone with woven comDetence in the field, a commitment to teaching,and concern for pre-college science education. Jerw A. Bell. Professor of Chemistrv. Simmons College, was selected as academic director. In addition to his teaching and research, Professor Bell is active in the American Chemical Society's Division of Chemical Education and had been one of the initiators of the Interface Program linking college and secondary school teachers in chemistry in the Boston area. The remaining faculty were chosen in collaboration with him. They were Henry A. Bent, Professor of Chemistry a t North Carolina State University, Alice Cunningham, Kenan Professor of Chemistry at Agnes Scott College, J. Dudley Herron, who holds joint appointments in Education and Chemistry at Purdue University, and David Olney, a top chemistry and physics teacher from Lexington (MA) High School, who would he in charge of this computer laboratory. Concurrentlv. a nationwide search was beeun for outstanding high ichool chemistry teachers to participate in the Institute. Publicity on the Institute appeared in the major journals for secondary school science teachers, including The Science Teacher. Science Activities. and Chemunitv. and was circulated to the state departments df education in t& 12 most ~ o ~ u l o states. us An av~licationwas develo~edthat hiehiightrd thv ttarht,r>' knlulcdgc and skill in the iield > t i tL.t.11 a> their lendership in h r n t r cducutiun within rheir a r h ~ d s and cirmnn~nilit.~. Tht. >tpplicatiunprowdurc \vm desixned r u he burricienth riwruus r h n ~onI\. s~riou.;I ~ l n d i d i ~u111uld te~ apply. ~articipantswereoffered room, hoard, and transportation, hut no additional stipend. In July 1982,fifty chemistry teachers chosen for their ability to teach and attract students to general chemistry (not AP chemistrv). as well as for their leadershiu skills. arrived on the campus of princeton University where they lived and worked for the duration of the Institute. Those selected to participate, who were subsequently designated as 1982 Dreyfus Master Teachers, came from 22 states and were equally dwided beThis feature serves as the source of educational opportunities far chemistry teachers. it includes up-to-date information on forthcoming workshops, seminars, and shon courses. Readers are also provided the ODDOrtunitv to relate their oersonai exoeriences with these education .. programs in iiaa I on reaoers are in.r!eo lo Ware ther orearns and sbggcwa aes gns for poss o e mrdsnops n 1111, ~ i lI )5 nopeo mar P O I 3 ~ spon,ors w n.iw a oener cea oi tne nwds and oes rer of their potential participants ~~~
~
~~
~
tween men and women. (There were more than 150 applicants from 30 states.) Eighty percent of them teach in public schools; the remainine twentv- oercent teach in orivate institutions, . including day schools, boarding schools, and religiously affiliated schools. Seven hold doctorates, thirtv-nine more have completed master's degrees. Of the fifty participants, thirty-nine majored in chemistry as undergraduates. Imolementation The Institute program was demanding and rich. The academic comwonent was built around the theme "Electrons in Motion" with specific focus on three subjects: molecular structure and bonding, electron transfer processes, and kinetics and catalysis. A Monday evening lecture series"Essays in Science: Substance With Stylen-co-sponsored by the Princeton University Department of Chemistry brought Hubert Alyea, Professor emeritus at Princeton, Leonard Nash, Harvard University, Bassam Sbakhashiri, University of Wisconsin, and Helen Free, Ames Division of Miles Laboratories, to Princeton. In addition to their public lectures, each of these essayists spent at least a full day at the Institute talking informallv with the warticiwants. Workshous were also &ranged with ~rbfessor~ l i e on a "~rmchair~ h e i i s t r ~ with ," an industrial chemist from DuPont, and with swecialists in the use of computers in science education. several other events were scheduled to take advantage of the unique educational and at Educational Testing Service with the Btaff responsible for test development in chemistry, advanced placement chemistry, and computer science. Despite this full calendar, 5 hours were reserved daily for independent work in the
groundwork that would insure that the Institute message and materials would spread well beyond the first ring of fifty teachers.' Meetinas have been held and more ~ l a n n e dfor groups of schools, &oss districts, and at regional A d nationa meetings of professional organizations like the American Chemical Society and the National Science Teachers Association. David Tanis, a teacher with 15 years experience, shed some light on the extraordinary excitement generated by the Institute. Speaking to the Dreyfus Foundation Board of Directors, during their visit to the Institute, he described a decade devoid of professional growth opportunities, of ten years when the stimulation of earlier National Science Foundation supoorted institutes and curriculum oroiects dissioated. naled. and disappeared. "Teachers had aimost forgottkn whit the; were missine." said Tanis. The Drevfus Institute refreshed the memories of many and opened new doors for others. I t gave them the opportunity to renew their own teaching and the incentive to reach out to others, who remain isolated in their classrooms, confined by limited local budgets and by massive cutbacks in federal funds that have virtually eliminiated these wrofessional develowment oooortunities. There will be three modules in the content Leas covered durinr the Institute that will include background information, expeGments, and demonstrations. one-module will cover computer material on these three areas and on high school chemistry in general and the final package will be acornpendium of other information presented at the Institute. A small committee of the Master Teachers has taken responsibility for shepherding this phase to completion by early 1983. The Woodrow Wilson Foundation will handle final mintingu and dissemination of the modules to the ~ r e y f u Master s Teachers and to interested science educators contacted through workshops and programs conducted by the Master TeacLers. The summer 1982 Dreyfus Institute was a modest hut highly successful first step to remedy the crisis in science education. A t the seventh Biennial Conference on Chemical Education, Stillwater, OK, August 1982, Jerry Bell characterized the Institute bv saving. ". . . we are trvine to create a general model for the'eff&&e and efficient u& of private funds, combined with mechanisms that are alreadv in wlace. to recapture the excitement and ferment of the "l960's, to create networks of teachers a t all levels workinn to imorove high school chemistry instruction, and to boost
