Chemical Education Today
Commentary
The Structure of Chemistry Roy W. Clark Department of Chemistry, Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, TN 37132:
[email protected] The first Provocative Opinion article appeared in this Journal thirty-two years ago. By Jay A. Young, it was titled “Restructuring Chemistry Curricula” (1) and suggested that the subdivision of chemistry into organic, inorganic, analytical, biochemistry, and physical chemistry was due for change. “These compartments no longer serve their original purpose: neatly dividing chemistry into separate topical areas in order that the whole subject might be better comprehended”, Young suggested. Because of the enormous inertia of curriculum reform, these subdivisions of chemistry are still the basis of course titles around the world, even if not the actual content of the courses. Young suggested that polymer, nuclear, colloid (surface), and radiation chemistry did not fit into these categories. Today we can add environmental chemistry, solidstate chemistry, electrochemistry, geochemistry, cosmochemistry, low-temperature chemistry, plasma chemistry, food chemistry, forensic chemistry, computational chemistry, and chemical education to that list. Even so, we still pretend that inorganic chemistry is somehow different from organic, that biochemistry is somehow different from both, and that physical chemistry is, as a teacher once told me, “everything in chemistry that is interesting.” This fragmentation into specialties is unimportant if it is viewed as the subtitle professors want on their name. I have no objection to chemists calling themselves by the name of their specialty. What I object to is that when they begin teaching, they wish to introduce courses in that specialty into the undergraduate curriculum. Undergraduate students should
1612
not specialize until their senior year, and perhaps not even then. The courses offered undergraduate college students should be foundation courses, suitable to underpin any specialty that may come later. Therefore, I propose a new structure, not for chemistry as a whole, but for college chemistry curricula. My new structure is based upon two firmly held beliefs: that courses through the third year should be nonspecialized, and that students should not be exposed to theories, which are explanations of things, until they have grasped what is to be explained. Thus, in my plan, empiricism always precedes theory. The subdivisions of college chemistry are: Basic chemistry Intermediate chemistry Advanced chemistry Specialized chemistry When taught at Ideal University they each consist of one semester of empirical information, which includes copious laboratory work, followed by one semester of theoretical explanation of the previous semester’s work. This latter semester is where we put the computer labs and CD-ROMs, and simulations of reality. The students by this time will easily recognize the considerable gulf between what happens on the simulators and what happens in reality. Literature Cited 1. Young, J. A. J. Chem. Educ. 1967, 44, 564.
Journal of Chemical Education • Vol. 76 No. 12 December 1999 • JChemEd.chem.wisc.edu
Chemical Education Today
A Proposed Curriculum for Nonspecialization in the First Three Years The Basic Chemistry Year
The Advanced Chemistry Year
Fall 1 Lecture: A readable textbook, not accompanied by “study guides”, answer books, or other distracting peripherals. [Why should students pay $75 for a text when $25 of that is for crutches designed to make reading the text unnecessary?] An enthusiastic instructor who assigns the textbook material and tests from it. See Final Comments at end about texts. Lab: At least two afternoons per week. Experiments are largely on seeing substances, handling them properly, observing their properties, and measuring their properties reproducibly. The vocabulary of chemists and the resulting ability to describe, both in words and numbers, what you have observed is emphasized. Computers not appropriate except as word processors. Grouping in lab: Despite tradition, I think students should work individually in labs throughout the first year. This means double the number of well-trained and knowledgeable laboratory assistants.
Fall 3 Lecture: The traditional inorganic and organic courses are combined into one course called advanced chemistry. Nomenclature has been covered earlier. Mechanisms and spectroscopic techniques are similar whether carbon compounds are involved or not. This one definitely needs a new textbook written for it. Lab: At least two afternoons per week. Synthesis of organic and inorganic compounds, and their characterization. Grouping in lab: Probably pairs for safety.
Spring 1 Lecture: Same as above. Topics include both inorganic and organic nomenclature. Organic functional groups compared with similar inorganic groups. Lab: At least two afternoons per week. Experiments are largely on explaining phenomena observed in Fall 1. Theory is compared with experiment. Computers are appropriate. Grouping in lab: Students work individually, as in Fall 1. The Intermediate Chemistry Year
Fall 2 Lecture: Traditional Quant (making of solutions, sample handling and massing, equilibria, extractions, quantitative unknowns, etc.), simple instrumentation. Lab: At least two afternoons per week. In my opinion this lab is where chemistry students become chemists, planning their own working habits, carefully paying attention to detail, creating their own reagents, reaping the consequences of sloppy work. This is where “the rubber meets the road,” as Ross Perot was so fond of saying. Grouping in lab: Students work in pairs for safety, but have individual unknowns. Spring 2 Lecture: Non-quantum, macroscopic p-chem (but don’t call it physical chemistry). More instrumentation introduced. How the instruments work is explained. Lab: At least two afternoons per week. Experiments are mostly calculational. Theory is compared with experiment. Computers are appropriate. Grouping in lab: Students work in pairs.
Spring 3 Lecture: Microscopic physical chemistry (but call it chemical theory). Quantum calculations. Lab: At least two afternoons per week. Experiments are largely on explaining phenomena observed in previous semesters. Theory is compared with experiment. Computers are appropriate. Grouping in lab: Depends on computers available. Individually is best. The Specialized Chemistry Year
Fall 4 and Spring 4 Lecture: Choice of whatever specialties are available in the department. Could be accompanied by “tools” courses, such as Literature Searching, Technical Writing, Special Instrument Courses, Computer Interfacing, etc. Lab: Whatever suits the instructor(s). Final Comments Ideally, new texts will be written for this new curriculum. However, older texts would suffice if instructors carefully chose the assignments. For example, gas laws and calculations in the fall, followed by explanation (kinetic molecular theory) in the spring. Electrical conductivity in the fall followed by theories of conduction, electrolyte theory, in the spring. Another example: Periodic trends in the fall followed by explanations of these trends (in electron configuration terms) in the spring. The blending of organic with inorganic in the Fall 3 semester, and the microscopic theory to explain it in Spring 3 will take a really creative writing team who know how to limit the subject material. One of the evils of modern textbooks is that they are encyclopedic. Physical chemistry texts are notorious for this, but all textbook authors are forced into this by reviewers. I call this textbook entropy. Someone some day has to say, “This is basic and every chemistry major should know it. This is interesting but can be included after specialization.”
JChemEd.chem.wisc.edu • Vol. 76 No. 12 December 1999 • Journal of Chemical Education
1613
