The TRAINING VALUE of CHEMISTRY in GENERAL EDUCATION* J. H. SIMONS Pennsylvania State College. State College, Pennsylvania
I
CRAVE your forbearance for my boldness in appearing before yon to speak upon this topic. In arranging the program I had some difficulty in finding a suitable speaker for it; and as the time for completing the program came to a close, I was persuaded to attempt it myself. What I will have to say will be neither very profound nor .carefully studied. I shall probably make dogmatic statements to which you may take exception. Without a&empting to speak with authority I shall only try to present the views on the subject which are held by many chemists. Probably the chief purpose of education is the training and discipline of the intelligence, and by intelligence I refer to those inherent qualities of mind that are used in thinking. Of the various factors that enter into clear thinking two seem to be of primary importance. One of these is observational skill, which depends upon sufficient power of concentration to retain and appreciate in a precise and accurate manner the facts, details, and ideas that reach the brain through the senses. As this involves the ability to concentrate, it is prohably related to accurate memory. The other is the quality of orderliness, the possession of which
* Contribution to the symposium on The Rale
of Chemistry Education, conducted jointly by Section C (Chemistry) and Section Q (Education) of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Pittsburgh, Dec. 27, 1934.
in
permits the orderly arranging and.$ataloging of facts and ideas in the mind. This is,probably the basis of analytical reasoning, which depends upon clarity and neatness of thinking. These two factors are the chief elements in what is known as the "scientific method of thought," which by the way is not peculiar to science but is the form and method of all clear thinking. It consists chiefly of a precise selection bf primary facts and ideas and then an orderly marshaling of them in a logical sequenre. It is my purpose to attempt to show that the subject of chemistry is an exceptionally good medium for training in these qualities and, in addition, in some other qualities such as a usable-imagination, manual skill, etc. What I shall say will naturally apply in many respects to the other branches of science, but in some respects the subject oi chemistry is superior a s a training medium. As chemistry deals with all the substances in the universe and their relationships and interconversions, whether these be living or lifeless, naturally found or manufactured, near a t hand or in some far-away star, the thought processes used on them involve all that is contained in materialistic logic. The materials dealt with are concrete substances, which, in the gross, are readily observed by our senses; and the results of the mental processes used in dealing with them can be
demonstrated by experiment. Keenness of observation is necessary not only for the research scientist but also for the elementary student. The subject matter is enormous and of great diversity, which necessitates an orderliness of mind to deal with it adequately. Both qualitative and quantitative methods of reasoning are required. The former involves the element of judgment and the careful selection of facts, and the latter, mathematical precision in the mental analysis. The theoretical treatments, to which even the elementary student is subjected, involve considerable power of imagination, as the ultimate particles of matter with which these theories deal, i. e., atoms, molecules, ions, and electrons (to say nothing of neutrons, photons, etc., which have not yet reached the elementaly texts) are not of sufficient size to be impressed upon our unaided senses. Such a wealth of mental processes and qualities of mind required for the subject make i t eminently suitable as a training medium. The teaching of the subject of chemistry depends, to a large measure, on the student's observation of the results of experiments, whether these be performed by the student himself or by the teacher in demonstration. The student needs keenness, both in qualitative observation in determining what has happened and in quantitative observation in ascertaining how much has occurred, and these qualities are developed by repeated use. The observation of all the various properties of matter that undergo changes in chemical transformations calls into play the various senses, and these become more skilled in ability to differentiate through such use. Color changes, odors, taste, temperature changes, variations in shape and size, etc., are involved. Sometimesthese are observed by the unaided senses and a t other times by the use of a variety of instruments. I have heard the story that a certain graduate student in another branch of learning set out in a research investigation to show that human beings had little power of distinguishing between different odors. Unfortunately for him, he madea study of research workers in organic chemistry and fougd that the original hypothesis was incorrect, when the olfactory sense has been developed by use, as it is in organic chemistry. We all know that as a student studies more and more chemistry his power of observation increases with the training, and his ability to distinguish improves. In research work we frequently speak of the trained observer, and by that imply a considerable difference between the trained and untrained. It is not the soundness of the organs of sense that is chiefly responsible for keenness of observation. The same impressions are made on the sense organs of two students watchmg the same experiment, but the one whose power of concentration is trained will gather much more information from the experiment and will appreciate it better. There can be little doubt that observational skill is of general educational value. That this involves concentrationon and appreciation of the sense impressions is also, I believe, generally accepted. The full-
ness of life depends to a great degree not on the number of years lived but on the appreciation and retention of the information obtained through sense impressions. That training in observation along one line is of value in a different type of work is generally recognized by scientific workers. If this is true, the observational training given in chemistry, with its great diversity and the basic part that it plays in teaching the subject, is of unusual value in general education. In order to make use of the great array of facts and details that are observed about matter in the study of chemistry, it is necessary that these be arranged and classified mentally in an orderly fashion. This calls into play an orderliness of mind. Clearness of thought is essentially orderly thinking; and as there is no fundamental difference between one array of facts and another or the methods of classifying them, training in these methods should be applicable to any subject matter. In chemistry a great variety of methods of classification is used, such as those of physical properties, use, structure, etc. Qualitative methods of grouping are sometimes employed, for example, those depending upon odor, taste, physical state, or whether it reacts as an acid, base, etc. More frequently, however, quantitative arrangements are required, which demand precision of observation and accuracy of selection In the subject of chemistry from the most elementary courses onward precise observations and precise thinking about them are greatly stressed. The emphasis placed upon these is one of the important tasks of the teacher of chemistry and should result in some improvement in the precision of thinking of the student. That this is true is partially demonstrated by the fact that students that have training on one branch of science are preferred students for some other branch, despite the great difference in subject matter in the different branches. Chemistry with its great range of methods of classification and its insistence on orderly and precise thinking offers an excellent means of training in these qualities. In life's problems there is ever present a great mass of detailed information, most of which is irrelevant to the solution of the problem a t hand. The proper selection of pertinent data requires the use of judgment. Even themost elementaq student in the chemical laboratory is surround$d by a mass of observational facts, details, and theories; and training is given in the proper selection from these for the explanations and desired results of the experiment. The explanation of unexpected results, which are frequently obtained, demands even greater skill than the expected. The training in this matter of judgment becomes one of the tasks of the teacher of chemistry; and considerable progress in this direction can be noticed, as the student progresses in his work. The mere memorizing of material from a textbook without the use of thought on the subject avails the student of chemistry but little. Analvtical reasoninn consists of keenness of observation, concentration on the subject a t hand, orderly
-
arrangement, and a careful selection of the data, combined with logical treatment leading to a conclusion. This is of constant use in chemistry, and the student is trained from the first in it. This training is particularly good, for the original data consist of facts that the student is made to observe; and the results of the logical processes are demonstrable by experiment. Such concrete examples of the power of analytical reasoning produce an enthusiasm for it, which greatly facilitates train'ig. The constant emphasis on correct deduction and the numerous illustrations of the value of its use force the student to obtain an appreciation of it. As i t is applied in chemistry not only to theoretical considerations but also to a great variety of facts of everyday experience, the student becomes accustomed to think logically about material things. Such training is invaluable in our modem materialistic world. It supplies a basis for the use of thought processes in place of purely emotional reactions and tends toward confidence in thinking rather than the acceptance of the word of authority. The expression "the scientific method of thought" merely signifies that clear, precise, and logical thinking is used in scientific pursuits. The same factors are involved and the same methods employed in any thought processes on any subject matter, and any person receiving training in these methods should be considerably' benefited. Perhaps the ways of reasoning used in science are more impersonal, are less influenced. by traditional methods, and contain less of emotional responses than the usual thought processes in other lines. This may be because science deals with impersonal material things; but the training given in separating emotion, tradition, and personal feelings from the thinking processes should be of considerable value. The subject of chemistry is rich in this type of training. In all creative work there is a factor in addition to analytical thinking. This is a sort of "usable imagiuatiou." Creative accomplishments are probably the most valued of all of man's numerous activities, for they add to the wealth of the race, in culturp. in material benefits, and in knowledge to a greater degree than does any other single activity. They also give to the individual the most extreme satisfaction; for example, witness the pride one takes in even a minor creative product, such as a mechanical invention, a bit of writing, or a piece of lace. Whereas, a creative imagination might be considered a talent or gift, nevertheless its training would be of great value. Despite the fact that chemistry may popularly be considered cold and unimaginative, even that portion with which the elementary student comes in contact contains much that is purely imaginative. It might be of interest, in passing, to note that many of our better known chemists have as avocations, poetry, literature, music, or art; and their accomplishments in these lines are frequently of high order. All the theoretical treatments in chemistry deal with bodies and particles that are imaginative although not fantastical, and both the creation and use of 'these theories require consider-
able use of the imagination. he teacher of chemistry has considerable di5culty in getting the beginning student to use his imagination on these matters and is continually drilling on its use. This is one of the reasons why the subject of chemistry is considered di5cult by some students; but because of it, it possesses a superior training value. I wish to be so bold as to state that I believe I can discover as much (or more) about a student's personality and mental qualities by watching him work in the laboratory for a short time, as I can by hours of conversation. There seems to be a certain correlation between the way he does things physically and the way he thinks. For example, it is frequently said that a messy desk indicates a messy mind, while an orderly desk indicates an orderly mind. Laboratory work in chemis* requires much more than mere manual dexterity applied to tasks in which this has been developed by repetition. Mental direction is required for every one of the manual operations. The success of much of the experimental work depends upon orddmess, neatness, and intelligent direction. Practically every manual skill known to man is drawn upon in the chemical research laboratory. The range extends from the heaviest machine to the finest and most delicate of precision instruments. Every known material of construction is made use of. Temperatures and pressures from the lowest t o . the highest obtainable are employed. Mechanical, electrical, and magnetic machines and instruments are used in all varieties and sizes; and if a proper one for the particular work cannot be found, it is invented. The skilled research chemist is a t home in a great variety of manual skills from the blowing of glass to the running of .alathe, and his versatility is indicated by the ease with which he develops new manual skills. He will successfully attempt and complete tasks involving operations with which he is completely unfamiliar. Even the elementary student is trained in a considerable variety of manual tasks, and his manual skill and dexterity.,are developed by this training. That the use of the hands plays a very important part in the l i e of all individuals cannot be disputed; and the discipline of the hands, especially where mental direction is required, should be of undisputed educational value. The chemical laboratory is an excellent place for such discipline, for the manual tasks required are not valued for themselves alone but as a means .for accomplishing some experimental or theoretical result. The means is thereby provided for stimulating interest, for many people are not greatly interested in performing a manual task without some additional incentive. The chemical laboratory also serves in another educational capacity. The opportunity is presented for the employment of Socratic method, a superior way of teaching. The teacher and student come in close contact, and by the use of question and answer the student can be directed to apply his mental effort to his work. The stimulation and mental training thus produced areprobably unexcelled.
Scientific studies in general and chemistry in particular tend greatly to strengthen character. Dishonesty and falseness are not tolerated and in addition are readily detected. It requires stamina and perseverance for the elementary student to perform his assigned tasks in the chemical laboratory. He is encouraged in the development of these important personal qualities. Cleanliness and neatness are also important factors in successful laboratory work, and the teacher usually insists upon them. Surely a very considerable general educational value is obtained in a course that gives training along these lines. There may be some question in your minds as to whether or not the teaching of elementary and advanced chemistry comes up to the standards that I have indicated. The possibilities are there; and if they are not developed, it is evident that the teacher is inadequately trained in chemistry. A person only supeficially acquainted with the subject cannot present it in the manner I have described. Only teachers with adequate training in the subject will have sufficient understanding and appreciation of it and its possibilities to use it as the superior training medium which it undoubtedly is. To summarize some of the points mentioned I will state that the teacher of elementary chemistry is coufronted with two major difficulties. The students coming to him lack in general two important qualities. The first lack is that of definiteness and precision, in reading, observation, ahd expression; and the second is that of facility in the use of even the simplest of logical processes. We commonly express this by saying that they cannot read nor use arithmetic. A considerable portion of the teacher's effort is spent not on the subject of chemistry but on an attempt to develop these important qualities. There is a certain vagueness and indefiniteness about both their reading and expression. They will read a question and obtain a vague idea to what it refers, and they will write a story about it without saying definitely anything of value. They prefer to use a mathpatical expression as a sort of mental crutch rather than go through the logical mental processes. The overcoming of these difficulties is the unique task of the teacher of chemistry, and he has an ideal medium for doing it. I have frequently stated and demonstrated that the difficultiesa student often has with an examination come not from a lack of knowledge of the subject matter but from an inability to read the question and appreciate exactly what it means. Once he can interpret it, he usually can answer it, for his previous training has been almost exclusively memory training, so that he will have remembered the facts required without any particular effort. If the student has been trained to think clearly, logically, and definitely before starting chemistry, the work of the chemistry teacher is greatly simplified. As many of the students are not so trained and these qualities are especially required in the subject, it becomes necessary for the teacher of chemistry to drill along these lines. By so doing he, perhaps, does the
student a greater service than he could by imbuing him with any amount of chemical factual material. I have assumed throughout this discussion that there is a very definite and important "carry-over" value in mental discipline. I recognize that this is a controversial matter. Scientists in general believe that there is, and a fairly strong argument in its favor can be preseuted. In physical things, such as athletics, we recognize that training in one technic is of value in the learning and performance in another. The professional boxer trains by running, jumping rope, playing ball, etc. If this is true for the use of the muscles, why should it not also be true for the mind? Manual dexterity developed in connection with one technic is of definite value on another. A person learns a third or fourth language more easily than the second. As the mental qualities and methods applied to one subject matter are very much the same as those applied to any other, it seems reasonable to expect that the development, training, and discipline of these qualities and methods would be of the utmost general value. I have been told that there are tests which tend to prove that there is no "cany-over" value of tlie mental qualities developed on one subject matter to another. I believe that the scientist is apt to question any such tests, a t least any that I have had the good fortune to investigate. The ability to handle a problem involving a subject matter, about which the student has had no previous knowledge, would seem to me to be a rather good test of mental quality. I would like to see a test developed which would give definite problems involving logical thought processes on a subject matter that has been invented purely imaginatively for the purpose of the test and about which no one could have any previous knowledge. Considerable data, much more than required for the solution of the problems, could be presented so that the student's ability to judge pertinent facts could also be ascertained. Scientists would, I believe, have confiden+ in tests made in this manner; and I would welcome their use in determining the training value of courses in chemistry. The facts and details preseuted in any course of study are retained but a short time after the completion of the course. An examination given on the factual material of any course five_years after its completion will always show that most of the facts have been lost. This demonstrates clearly that they have but little permanent value. Any facts required for any future work are obtained when needed. If, then, there is any permanent value in a course, it is the development and training of mental and manual qualities and methods. If these are of value only on the particular academic subject matter, they also are of but little importance in general education. It seems, therefore, that the only considerable value that school courses can have is the general mental and manual discipline. If there is no "carry-over" value to this training and discipline, there is no general value to education itself.
