PACIFIC SOUTHWEST ASSOCIATION OF CHEMISTRY TEACHERS THE SUMMER CONFERENCES' T. BENTLEY EDWARDS University of California, Berkeley, California
ATTHE heart of the summer conferences on the teach-
ing of chemistry are the discussion sections of eight or ten people. At these sessions, which have been sponsored every summer since 1950 by the Division of Chemical Education of the A. C. S., a comparatively small number of teachers of chemistry meet often enough, and long enough, to get to know each other well. When men first meet, the role they play is dignificd, smooth, and superficial. No difficulties are admitted with respect to content, there are no qualms about what to teach, and the method of teaching is precise. After meeting for x hours face to face with each other in a comparatively smoll room, after sharing the same table for lunch, dinner, and even breakfast, and after exchanging confidences with a roommate far on into the night, the role is changed suddenly and dramatically. Questions concerning content, choice of content, and method are freely introduced and freely discussed. The importance of the discnssion group will be related to each of these three. There can be no doubt that some men, experts in a given field of chemistry, know more about that field - than other chemists. These men are worth listening to. The most efficient way to listen to them is in a lecture. Hence lectures are given at the summer conferences. But communication of thought, especially the abstruse thoughts of chemistry is never complete when the traffic is all one way. The listener needs to work over the ideas himself in order to give them meaning, and he needs an opportunity to check this meaning with others. There is another reason for the discussion group in relation to the learning of new content. When he is relating material that is well authenticated, Professor X is on safe ground, and he will probably he accepted by even the most critical of his listeners. But when he approaches more closely the frontier of his science and speaks of matters over which there is still that controversy so essential to the development of fruitful scientific concepts, the unchallenged monologue does not satisfy all of our requirements. LPresented before the joint meeting of the h'arthern and Southern Sections of the Pacific Southwest Association of Chemistry Teachers at Fresno State College, Fremo, Cdifornia, February 18, 1056.
Not all of the facts and theories of chemistry are equally teachable to all students. One man can scarcely tell another how to choose the best subject matter content of chemistry. Here again, teachers should get together and talk things over. To some extent, there must be a common scope and sequence, but groups meeting to decide on minimum essentials do not reach agreement easily. From a restricted point of view me might say that because teaching and learning are essentially a private piece of business, choice of subject-matter should remain with the two individuals concerned, namely the teacher and the learner. A more inclusive point of view leads to the recognition that because a teacher must usually teach a numher of students more or less simultaneously, because of the need for instructional materials, and because of student mobility from teacher to teacher and even from institution to institution, a t least a fairly broad agreement is desirable. The best instruction in chemistry demands first that the instructor knows some chemistry, second that he is able to choose wisely from what he knows, and third that he does a good job of teaching this selected content. According to some, improvement in native tearhing ability, aside from instruction in content, is not possible. To them, teaching is an art, a highly personal art, and skill in this art is not communicable. According to others, the art of teaching is all. I t is completely communicable and the teacher of anything needs only to learn to teach. Actually, a good chemistry teacher must not only know chemistry, he must know other thmgs too. He needs a solid grounding in physics and a t least a nodding acquaintance with geology, and perhaps with other physical sciences. He should have a thorough knowledge of the process or method or philosophy of science. He must have facility with language, since language is used to rommunicate the abstract concepts of chemistry alld he must have facility with the necewry mathematics. All of this knowledge requires fairly constant revision, revision that demands opportunity for serious conversation with a number of broadly rultivated people. From the point of view of chemistry teaching as an art, the artistic devices that can be shared when a
VOLUME 33, NO. 7,
JULY, 1956
353
group of chemists discuss creative teaching is a joy well known to those who have participated in a summer conference. But the art has an empirical base. The plight of those who have been unable to keep abreast of the findings of sociologists and psychologists in recent years is understandable. Chemists are busy people, and the findings of psychologists and sociologists pertinent to the teaching of chemistry, the pay dirt so to speak, is covered with a heavy layer of overburden. I n a small group session, one who has the pertinent findings a t his fingertips can perhaps share them with others. At least he has a better chance than the one lecturing to a large group who may sense somewhat helplessly a rejection of his material. I n the small group, those who have already developed a sympathetic attitude toward the findings are provided with an opportunity of using their supporting prestige. A conative approach is needed with those who, while upholding the application of a philosophy of logical positivism in their laboratories, are understandably reluctant to permit the uncertainties of this approach to be carried over into anything so close to their private lives as their teaching. At any rate, the present state of knowledge concerning the psychology of learning is such that even one who specializes in it must suggest rather than insist. On all three counts, the small group session provides the heart of the summer conference on chemistry teaching. Since the days of the first three conferences held a t Stillwater in the summers of 1950-52, the idea of a conference, not only for professors, but also for secondary school teachers of chemistry has taken hold.% The impressive length of the list of proposals for the summer of 1956 published in THIS JOURNAL' is evidence for this. To Otto M. Smith, the guiding genius in the first days of the chemistry workshops, all of this must seem like a dream come true. a
MORRELI.,W. E.,
AND
A number of members have suggested that the Pacific Southwest Association of Chemistry Teachers sponsor a summer institute; plans have been made for a modest workshop this summer a t Big Sur State Park. To put on a successful conference, you need a man who can set the stage so that the meeting, greeting, eating, and sleeping take place with a minimum of confusion. Second, you need a few speakers who not only know what is going on in the forefront of our science, but how to get their ideas across. Third, you need someone, like the incomparable Hubert Alyea, who can really show us how to carry out some aspect of chemistry teaching, in his case, the demonstration. But most of all you need to get the teachers of chemistry together in groups small enough for an abundant discussion. At Stillwater we used to start most of the days with a really good speaker. We would then break up into small groups and meet again for an hour or two; then films, inspection of exhibits, field trips, recreation, and so on until dinner. Evenings were varied: sometimes a speaker, perhaps recreation, reading, or preparation of re~orts. Often we had meetines t o discuss more or less isolated problems. One such meeting that was particularly impressive was the place of religion in the teaching of chemistry. Most of all, these conferences should be designed to give the tired teacher a lift, a feeling that others share his burden.
-
Newly-elected State Officers of PSACT
0.M. SMITH,. I . CHEWEDUC.,32,
262 (1955).
J, Crrcnr Eouc., 33, 180 (1956).
President:
Roy Newsom Whittier College Whittier, California. Treasurer: Me1 Gorman University of San Francisco San Francisco, California Secretary: Dorothy Craig Marlborough School Los Angeles, California.
A Question How can a high-school student detect in himself the qualifications for a technical career?
A n Anmet. Those qualities that make for an engineering or scientific rareer are also those that make for a successful career in any field. Of all the general qualities, I believe creativeness and individuality are to he most sought. In a specific sense, the high-school student might detect qualities that would lead him into engineering or the sciences if he would honestly ask himself such questions as the following: 1 Do I have a native curiositv about mv natural environment and man's control over it? ( 2 j Do I think in terms of meakrements"or numbers? How well do I do in mathematics? Do I like logic and argument? (3) Am I challenged by a problem? For example, uill I spend what might seem to be useless time on solving brain teasers? Do I like games, pbrticularly those that require some analysis? (4) Do I have an imagination? Is my mind one that has the capacity to dream of what the future might hold? These are difficult for even mature people to answer, but they represent the key element in engineering or scientific training.
JR., Dean @Engineering, Agriculluml and Mechanical College of Teza.~, J O H NC. CALHOUN, as quoted by Magnolia News
