NOVEMBER, 1955
TIME-SAVING READING IN CHEMISTRY A. J. PELLETTIERI University of Houston, Houston, Texas
R E A D I N G plays a vital role in the training and life work of a chemical engineer. For the practicing engineer reading is a never-ending must. One editorscientist reported that about half a million scientific papers are published each year. Who reads these papers and how can the ideas be spread? There are many problems involved in knowing what is going on in science and how to use this information. For the student, reading is the one indispensable art which may determine his college career, affect his course of study, fix the hours to be spent in daily assignments, and perhaps even keep him from majoring in science. This paper will deal mainly with the educational and improvement possibilities of reading. Chemists and professors of chemistry are now showing more interest in such facets of reading as comprehension, speed, variability, and reading habits. Many want to know what is wrong with their reading. One reason for poor reading habits may be traced to the profession one follows. The proofreader and the chemist may be cited as examples. A reader of proof looks for misspelled words in his work. He does not
read for meaning and in time he will read everything as though he were spelling silently. Proofreaders generally are slow readers, victims of t,heir calling. They are one-way readers. I n somewhat the same way a chemist, owing to his sense of engineering accuracy, tends to he limited and hampered in general reading skills. His style is usually slow and studious as he strives for total mastery of the topic. Soon this may become his only reading skill. Chemists generally are inflexible readers. They, like the proofreader, tend to become one-way readers. Reading is not a simple activity. It is a complex process which calls for continuing thought reconstruction during the act of reading, by the reader, based upon his background. These thoughts in turn may spark some latent ideas which may serve immediate or future needs in many ways; the needs for reading and the values attached to them may not be the same. Reading should be purposeful and evaluative. How it should be done should depend in some measure upon why one would want to read in the first place.
592
Once that is recognized, purpose and interest should certainly determine the particular skill to be used in reading. Variability in reading skills is desirable and essential for most readers. Reading for the main idea, general information, reporting, pleasure, or for study should each be handled differently by the reader. These are the skills which chemists and students of engineering need to develop. If one is reading for general information the rate of reading should be several hundred words a minute faster than when reading for study. A fast rate of, say, 40C-500 words per minute should be used in reading practically all professional journals. Important articles may be handled a t a somewhat slower rate, preferably on the second reading. Time yourself in reading your copy of THIS JOURNAL. I t should take about two and one-half hours to read the articles and book reviews. It is an appreciation of these different ways of reading that is needed in the training of chemists and chemistry teachers. Unwittingly, teachers through the upper grades and in colleges have kept students from becoming better readers. Lack of proper teacher direction in developing reading skills is partly to blame. Only too entrenched is the idea that a good grade is synonymous with good reading. It may be a sign of comprehension, but it is not necessarily indicative of effective reading. Frequently students are enjoined to study well when what they really need is to learn to read more efficiently. Study after reading would serve some purposes much better than study while reading. Another stumbling block to the more facile reading of scientific articles is the hand-me-down idea that science is tough. Again our schools and society "set" a prejudice against chemistry long before the student begins to read, study, or know what chemistry is. Chemistry has always been represented to the prospective student as a difficult course. Along with that "set" goes another, namely, that technical material is hard to read. This attitude no doubt has conditioned the chemist against doing technical reading in an easier manner. These notions need to be displaced, if for no other reason than that language itself is an abstraction. For what is chemistry to those who are capable of abstraction? I t is a sign language, an abstraction, which fortunately also has many objects of art to which lahels can be attached. I n education we need to understand and make use of the fact that chemistry is
JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL EDUCATION
no more difficult than the language it requires to espress it. We also need to recognize that a large proportion of the population is capable of abstraction and can therefore learn chemistry. If this were done perhaps more capable students would be attracted to engineering and chemistry instead of being frightened away. The second notion, that technical reading is difficult reading, also needs to be corrected. A question will help clear the issue. Technical to whom? A lay reader picking up a chemical magazine would find the "technical" going rough. However, there is no "technical" langnage to the chemist who picks up the same magazine. Technical reading for the chemist is, or should be, common reading; it is technical only to the untrained in chemistry. Here again a wrong notion may have caused many professional people to believe they could not read more efficiently. The consequences may be grave, a t least reading-wise and subscription-wise; slow readers will not spend enough time reading, nor will they subscribe to the magazines pertinent to their professional growth. The development of reading skills is important to chemists and teachers of chemistry if they expect to keep abreast of literature in chemistry and allied fields. Professors can aid students to read more effectively by helping them to understand that, without sacrifice of comprehension, they can improve their speed in reading by following these few simple rules. (1) Read without looking back. If you have this weakness start now to do less of it. Some regression is permissible at times. (2) Read to get the general idea. This is a useful skill to develop as it will really give one the chance to read rapidly. Short stories and articles of 10001500 words make good practice materials. (3) Practice making fewer stops per line. For this purpose newspaper-size lines are ideal. One will not be lost for lack of interesting or challenging reading material because a number of magazines also use the narrow-width line. Do avoid fine print and closely spaced reading matter. As proficiency is acquired, one will think more in larger phrase units rather than in chopped-up, smaller, word-for-word segments. People who read better mill take the time to survey the current periodicals in the field and will also have time for careful study of the articles of greater importance. Let better reading play a vital daily role in your chemical future.
