The Web is a powerful tool. Like all powerful tools it can be used for good, for not-so-good, and for downright bad purposes. Examples of the last surface every so often, such as false biographical information planted in Wikipedia (1) and destruction of a reputation and job by a Web-based campaign of exaggerated accusations (2). In the social system of the Web, things can rapidly get out of hand. Unlike the small-town gossip mill of yore, the Web affords little opportunity to judge a source of information. Science on the Web probably has less really bad content, but there is plenty of not-so-good to go around, some of which might have unfortunate consequences.

It is important that students-and the rest of us-be able to distinguish among the good, the not-so-good, and the bad on the Web. To make such distinctions requires thinking critically about what is viewed. Therefore we should take every opportunity to help students develop the skills needed to assess the accuracy, validity, and ethics of the torrent of information that inundates them every day. As I mentioned last month, one way to enhance such skills is to encourage students to think critically about what they see on the Web. Here are some suggestions along these lines.

An article in this issue, “Magnetized Water: Science or Fraud?”, describes student laboratory studies that determine whether water can be softened by applying magnets to the outside of copper pipes (3). (A Google search for “magnet water soften” yields about 369,000 hits. Most sites on the first Google page claim that magnets soften water and then offer to sell you a kit to install in your home.) This article provides an excellent way for students to learn how to apply scientific investigation to an issue they might be wondering about as a result of their forages through the Web.

Did you know that there is a different form of water, HHO? A Google search for HHO yields about 5,860,000 hits (a search for H2O yielded about 32,800,000). Some of the Web sites describe oxyhydrogen mixtures used in welding, where HHO describes the ratio, 2 H₂ to 1 O₂, of the gases fed to the torch. Most of the hits are less benign, leading to sites such as “Run Your Car on Water” (4), which make exaggerated claims that fuel economy can be increased by adding to the engine a water electrolyzer powered by the battery/alternator and piping the hydrogen-oxygen mixture to the engine’s air intake. These sites raise a lot of questions. Students could be asked to apply the first two laws of thermodynamics to using the battery (which is charged by the engine) to generate the fuel to run the engine. More advanced questions also arise: Could the hydrogen-oxygen mixture enhance octane; would that matter? Why do so many people who have installed electrolyzers say that their fuel economy improves; can so much empirical observation be wrong? Could the hydrogen-oxygen mixture catalyze combustion of fuel? Is it ethical to set up a Web site that purports to debunk claims of running a car on water, but in fact directs users to the “top three” sites that advocate for (and sell) electrolyzers? How many of the Web sites and testimonials supporting HHO for cars are created by the people selling electrolyzers?

This is not intended as a rant against the Web, which is a very useful tool and certainly provides far more benefit than cost to society and to science. I located references 1 and 2 on the Web in only a few minutes using Google searches and both references are available with a single mouse click to online readers. It’s not just the Web that provides incomplete or misleading information. Even a staid newspaper of record, the New York Times, can miss important points in its reporting. For example, students could be directed to a story about the introduction of a hydrogen-powered automobile (5) and asked what important information is not reported. (The headline is “Latest Honda Runs on Hydrogen, Not Petroleum” but nowhere in the story is there any mention of where the hydrogen will come from; right now, it comes from petroleum!)

These are only some of the many possible examples where material on the Web (or in newspapers, a medium many teachers already use effectively) can help students develop scientific skepticism, curiosity, and empiricism. As a means of collecting ideas from the community of JCE readers, I invite you to go to the ChemEd DL wiki, log in, and enter your ideas or expand on the ideas others have provided (6). Ideas need not be fully developed or as carefully defined as they would be in a published paper. The wiki provides a means by which all of us can help to develop each others’ ideas into more fully fledged instructional scenarios. Please join others in the community and contribute.

Literature Cited

1. Siegenthaler, John USA Today, Nov 29, 2005; http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2005-11-29-wikipedia-edit_x.htm (accessed Aug 2008).

2. Sorkin, Andrew Ross New York Times, Aug 5, 2008, p C1; http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/05/business/05sorkin.html?_r=1&scp=3&sq=Sorkin%20Andrew%20Ross&st=cse&oref=slogin (accessed Aug 2008).

3. Lahuerta Zamora, L.; Anton-Fos, G. M.; Aleman Lopez, P. A.; Martin Algarra, R. V. J. Chem. Educ. 2008, 85, 1416.   See http://www.jce.divched.org/Journal/Issues/2008/Oct/abs1416.html . (Accessed Sep 2008)

4. http://runyourcarwithwater.com/?hop=webdirect2 (accessed Aug 2008).

5. Fackler, Martin New York Times, Jun 17, 2008, p C1. See http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/17/business/worldbusiness/17fuelcell.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=Fackler%20June%2017%202008&st=cse&oref=slogin. (Accessed Sep 2008

6. http://wiki.chemeddl.org/index.php/Communities:Journal_of_Chemical_Education (accessed Aug 2008).

Thinking Critically about Critical Thinking: In…

from Erica Jacobsen, JCE High School Editor

The WonderLab Museum in Bloomington, IN was alive with movement and sound. Limber bodies snaked up a two-story maze called the “Grapevine Climber” to arrive triumphantly at the top. Massive soap bubbles burst, showering heads with a misty spray. Cheers and applause broke out as the centerpiece of a tall foam-block arch was successfully put in place. Participants gave in to the excitement of the museum—everyone was having a ball. The crowd that night? Chemistry educators attending the 2008 Biennial Conference on Chemical Education (BCCE). As I watch my own children interact with the world around them, I cherish their exuberance and willingness to let go and be in the moment without worrying about appearances or what someone else will think. That night at BCCE I felt free to act as my children would have.

I look forward to National Chemistry Week (NCW) because it provides a bigger stage and opportunity for all of us, no matter our age, to be exuberant about chemistry. The wording of the 2008 American Chemical Society (ACS) NCW theme personifies that idea—“Having a Ball with Chemistry”. The October 2008 issue of the Journal of Chemical Education, particularly the Chemical Education Today section, focuses on this universally appealing sports-related theme. The authors as well as JCE staff have made an enormous effort to present an array of ideas and activities that will excite you and your students as well as those around you.

With the sea of blanketing October’s table of contents (indicating articles of interest to high school teachers), it is difficult to single out only an article or two to focus on. But here’s a great chance to dive into this issue anywhere and find something valuable.

And let’s think for a few minutes about next year’s NCW. I realize that when this issue comes out, you’ll still have about a month to gear up for this year’s celebration. But here at JCE, we’re already making plans for next year and invite you to join in the process. ACS offers the 2009 theme “Chemistry—It’s Elemental!” What articles would you like to see? What do you already use in your classroom that you could submit and share? Email me.

One easy way for everyone to participate is to first ask “What’s my favorite element?” Then, become a fan of that element online! You can become a “friend of the periodic table” and at the same time take an active part in the Division of Chemical Education social network online. It takes three steps:

1. Go to http://wiki.chemeddl.org/index.php/PTL:Elements_at_Facebook. Choose an element.
2. If you’re not in facebook.com already, join by clicking on sign up and filling out the information on the right portion of the screen. (If you are in Facebook, just log in to Facebook at the URL in step 1.)
3. You are now in Facebook. Go to Groups and request to join the Division of Chemical Education. When you are at the CHED Group page, click on: Become a fan of your favorite element. Select an element at http://wiki.chemeddl.org/index.php/PTL:Elements_at_Facebook. You will find a list of Links to element profiles at Facebook. Click on your favorite.

I chose titanium. You’ll see it mentioned in the October issue in connection with various sports equipment. But did you know it’s also part of M&M’s candy? Titanium dioxide is used to print the “m” on the candy.

Laura’s Take on the Issue
from Laura Slocum, JCE High School Associate Editor

I’m like Erica. NCW is one of my favorite times of the school year. It gives me the opportunity to be even more exuberant about my passion for chemistry. There are many ways to explore this year’s theme. A colleague encouraged me to “Have a BALL celebrating this year’s theme!!!” as he tossed a tennis ball at me. I have been collecting various types of balls to use for NCW throughout the summer; however, while reading Hawkes’s article I was reminded of a whole set of balls that I had not even considered—glass balls. Discussing glass and its properties with students often opens up lots of questions. I have found that glass is one substance they really like to explore, and the topic continues to raise questions long after we have completed the unit on states of matter. Hawkes’s article provided more depth for me in regard to the classification of glass—a solid or a liquid?—and it helped me to more broadly consider the many different types of glass. I think you will find his article really informative and enjoyable.

JCE High School Chemed Learning Information Center (CLIC)

from Laura Slocum, JCE High School Associate Editor

New has been defined in various ways—recently made, created, or invented; recently discovered or noticed; recently introduced and previously unfamiliar; at the beginning of another day, month, or year. At this time of year most of us are probably thinking about this last definition of new. However, for me right now it means changed, especially changed for the better. I have rewritten my Chemistry and AP Chemistry curricula for this school year, reordered many of the topics, and put in several new labs and projects. I am really looking forward to what these “new” changes will bring to my classes.

What does new mean to you? The September 2008 issue of the Journal of Chemical Education contains a number of interesting “new” ideas that can be used in our classrooms in a variety of ways this year. In the Classroom Activity Connection, Linda Fanis points out a number of new Web sites that contain valuable information related to color—the Tie-Dye Wiki connection gave me additional information to include in the spring semester of my chemistry course and the General Chemistry Online Acids and Bases: FAQs Web site will be a valuable resource for both my Chemistry and AP Chemistry students.

Forces of attraction between particles, especially intermolecular forces of attraction between the various types of molecules, can often be a stumbling block for students. Jasien provides several alternative ways to help students assess the relative strength of these different types of intermolecular attractions. I am looking forward to trying his approach, especially with my AP Chemistry students this fall.

I am always looking for new lab ideas, so Belle-Oudry’s use of EDTA to determine the concentration of sulfate ions using an indirect titration method really appeals to me. I want my AP Chemistry students to have unique lab experiences that are different from those of their first-year. I think this idea provides a nice extension to titration, and uses materials that are readily available to high school teachers. I plan to use this lab in October.

There is one article in this issue that does not contain “new” ideas for the classroom, but I think it contains something even more important—encouraging, uplifting, insightful words from a teacher who poured out his heart to those of us at the High School Program at the ACS National Meeting last April in New Orleans: Richard Goodman, the 2008 Conant Award recipient. The energy and enthusiasm Goodman shared with each of us that day, he shares with each of you through his interview with the JCE Editorial Staff. His words reminded me why I do what I do and why it is so very important: it is not for the administration, the parents, or even myself—it is for the students whose lives we get to touch for the brief moments in time that we have them in our classrooms. Some of them we never change and some of them we change forever.

I hope that this year brings you the very best and that each of us touches at least one student’s life forever. Have a great school year!

Richard Goodman, 2008 Conant Award recipient, demonstrates for his students. Photo by Shailaja Iyer.

Erica’s Take on the Issue
from Erica Jacobsen, JCE High School Editor

Laura has described Goodman’s presentation at the High School Day program in New Orleans this past spring. Unfortunately, I was not able to attend and see him in person. However, I agree that his interview in this issue really shares the flavor of his personality, teaching style, and love for chemistry. Goodman commented on his appreciation for the summer Biennial Conferences on Chemical Education and the ChemEd conferences, often combining his attendance with a family vacation. Our family has done the same at these and ACS conferences, and it’s given us an excuse to drive to many new places that we wouldn’t normally have been able to visit—Vancouver, Washington, DC, Toronto, and Auburn, AL (with a stopover at Graceland!).

This issue provides two more opportunities to travel and “see” new places—without even leaving your home. Coppola shares his experience connecting with chemistry educators in Indonesia, while Chao and Churchill describe common Chinese chemical terms and characters. There are even audio files of the chemistry vocabulary terms, to get a feel for the spoken language. It’s a chance to learn something new about the experiences and lives of your colleagues, even those around the world.

JCE High School Chemed Learning Information Center (CLIC)

I have always liked Rudolph Clausius’s statement of two laws of thermodynamics in the original German: “Die Energie der Welt ist konstant. Die Entropie der Welt strebt einem Maximum zu”. If you know thermodynamics and a little German, this statement summarizes a wealth of experimental data. The title of this editorial is the second law translated into “txt lingo”, the language of text messages and other abbreviated communications, by a Web service called “Transl8it!” (1). It seems to me that more has been lost in that translation than between the German and the English versions.Wen U compose a msg UzN a ceL fone keypad 2 entR letRz, it iz natRL 2 abbreviate az much az posebL. It is also natural to wonder what happens to the writing skills of those who send text messages via phones. In a recent issue of The Atlantic, Nicholas Carr, a writer on technology issues, asks, “Is Google Making us Stupid?” (or, as the cover of the magazine has it, “Is Google Making Us Stoopid?”) (2). Others have also suggested that modern technology and multitasking significantly reduce our ability to concentrate and perhaps alter the way we think and process information (3). If they are correct, the implications for education are profound.

Carr reports anecdotes from bloggers who say that they no longer read at length and in depth, but rather scan many items in bite-sized chunks from a broad range of sources. He quotes a study of browsing behavior by users of Web-based research sites in the U.K. that says, “users are not reading online in the traditional sense”. The way we read, and the way we use other information technologies, can and do affect the way we think. There is evidence that the more we multitask and the more fragmented our inputs of information, the less able we are to make connections and gain insights from concentrated thinking, without distraction, over significant spans of time.

To concentrate on and think about a single subject without interruption is a luxury and ought to be highly valued. Those to whom that luxury is available should not throw it away in a frenzy of multitasking, abbreviated writing, and flea-like jumps to read one tidbit after another on the Web. Deep thinking and thoughtful reading and writing are essential skills that need to be taught and nurtured. A major value of traditional liberal-arts education is that students and faculty have time to contemplate human knowledge and develop their own personal mental edifice reflecting the intellectual tradition.

The less contemplation and deep thinking are included in everyday life, the more we teachers need to make certain that our students develop and value these intellectual skills. One way to do this is to ask and encourage students to think critically about what they read on the Web (more on this next month). Another way is to show that we ourselves value thinking, to practice it in front of students, and to require that students evaluate critically all of the information they take in—including what comes from the front of the classroom. In support of this we need to actively encourage questioning and discussion in our classes, to provide opportunities for students to talk, even argue, with each other about scientific subjects, and to make certain that students have assignments and evaluations that require more than rote regurgitation of facts.

Teaching critical thinking is very important but it is neither easy nor straightforward (4). Thinking and content are closely intertwined and each student’s prior knowledge will influence how the student thinks about any issue. Scientific thinking is not a simple skill for which an algorithmic procedure can be developed and taught. It requires practice, constructive feedback, and a high level of teacher skill. Evaluating whether students’ scientific thinking abilities are improving is subjective, difficult, and time consuming, particularly when we would like students to be able to apply what they have learned to a variety of new, unfamiliar situations. Testing for such transfer leaves a teacher open to the complaint, “You didn’t teach us that.” Nevertheless, we need to do more, not less, in this area of teaching. Perhaps the Web, which can facilitate rapid, broad exchange of information, will be able to help us learn to teach critical thinking faster than it makes us all “stoopid”.

Literature Cited

1. transL8it! Make Sense of Txt Lingo. (accessed Jul 2008); I thank Janice Hall Tomasik for making me aware of this site.
2. Carr, Nicholas. The Atlantic 2008, 301, 56–63.
3. Kirn, Walter. The Atlantic 2007, 300, 66–80.
4. Willingham, Daniel T. American Educator 2007, 31(2), 8–19.

Upon this gifted age, in its dark hour,
Rains from the sky a meteoric shower
Of facts … they lie unquestioned, uncombined.
Wisdom enough to leech us of our ill
Is daily spun; but there exists no loom
To weave it into fabric;

Excerpted from a sonnet by Edna St. Vincent Millay
in Huntsman, What Quarry?
New York: Harper and Brothers, 1939.

Thinking Critically about Critical Thinking: In…

Mathematics is fundamental to science because a great many aspects of science are best described and elucidated using mathematical tools. Lack of preparation in mathematics hampers many students’ efforts to learn science and prevents many other students from pursuing science at all. Consequently, mathematics education is important not only for mathematicians, but for all scientists. Of course it is even more important for students, because growth of jobs in science and engineering is outpacing overall job growth by 3:1 (1).

In March of this year the National Mathematics Advisory Panel, which was created in 2006 by executive order of President Bush and chaired by Larry R. Faulkner, issued its final report (1). The report is mainly concerned with mathematics education in the pre-K through 8 levels and uses preparation for success in algebra courses as its main theme. The report notes that a sharp falloff in U.S. mathematics achievement appears to begin around grade 8, both on internal measures such as the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and by comparison with other countries. This falloff corresponds with the beginning of course work in algebra, which the report considers to be “a demonstrable gateway to later achievement”. Because algebra and more advanced mathematics are crucial in the background of students taking chemistry, the panel’s recommendations are worthy of our scrutiny and potential support.

The panel’s message involves six elements:

• Streamline the pre-K-8 curriculum to emphasize the most critical topics
• Use what is clearly known from rigorous educational research
• Recognize that the role of classroom teachers is crucial and find ways to attract, prepare, identify, and reward good teachers
• Achieve a balance between student-centered and teacher-directed instruction
• Improve the quality of NAEP and state assessments and increase their emphasis on critical knowledge and skills
• Continue to build capacity for rigorous educational research to inform policy and practice

The report envisions a “focused, coherent progression of mathematics learning, with an emphasis on proficiency with key topics”. The key topics involve whole numbers, fractions (including decimals, percent, and negative fractions), and aspects of measurement and geometry. Proficiency is defined as it was in an earlier report (2) to mean conceptual understanding, ability to do tasks like addition or subtraction without thinking, accurate execution of standard algorithms, ability to solve problems, and belief that mathematics is useful, worthwhile, and something that can be learned through diligent study.

The report emphasizes the importance of teachers’ content knowledge and recommends that teachers have “ample opportunities to learn mathematics for teaching”. Mathematics for teaching is not just the mathematics that will be taught, but also includes more advanced topics and how these connect with what students are expected to learn. Value-added analyses based on learning gains instead of students’ absolute scores are recommended as the best way to evaluate teachers’ effectiveness.

The report points out that U.S. mathematics textbooks are extremely long and that other countries where textbooks are much shorter outperform the U.S. One factor contributing to the long mathematics books was the need to meet diverse state standards for what should be taught in each grade. States are called on to collaborate to define more uniformly what content is appropriate at each grade level. The report also calls for changes in state and national examinations so that students are evaluated on the content the report has identified as most crucial.

Finally, the report emphasizes the importance of “methodologically rigorous scientific research in…teaching and learning of mathematics”. In many cases, no such research was found to support or refute a contention the panel was studying. More educational research that can be applied to specific issues is called for. To make this easier the panel requests streamlining of Institutional Review Board procedures for educational research deemed of low risk to students.

All of this applies equally to chemistry. Instruction and learning should be based on the intellectual structure of the discipline and on pedagogical knowledge about order of topics. Students should be able to understand concepts, apply what they know to solving new problems, and come away with a feeling the chemistry is worthwhile and can be learned through diligent study. Teachers need background well beyond what they teach and those who improve student learning the most should be valued above those lucky enough to have excellent students. Textbooks and other learning materials could certainly be leaner if we agreed on the most important concepts and skills, decided where in the curriculum they should be taught, and taught each one thoroughly, once. Examinations (AP for example) do influence curriculum, so changing them will help a new approach be adopted. And using rigorous chemical education research to evaluate teaching and learning in support of developing new, more effective curricula is an excellent idea. Research with practical implications is exactly what this Journal wants to publish in our Chemical Education Research feature.

Literature Cited

1. National Mathematics Advisory Panel, Foundations for Success: The Final Rport of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel, U.S. Department of Education: Washington, DC, 2008; available at http://www.ed.gov/mathpanel/ (accessed June 2008).

2. National Research Council.. Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. J.Kilpatrick, J. Swafford, and B.Findell (Eds.). Mathematics Learning Study Committee, Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2001; available at http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=9822 (accessed June 2008).

Mathematics Education Around the World

I recently had the pleasure of listening to a talk, “Scientific Challenges in Sustainable Energy Technology”, by Nathan S. Lewis, California Institute of Technology. Lewis summarized data on energy resources and provided his analysis of their implications for the future of human society. He has provided slides, text, and a streaming audio/video version at his Web site (1). There is much in this presentation that could (and should) be incorporated into chemistry pedagogy.

Briefly, Lewis argues that

• appropriate use of energy is by far the most important challenge facing both the U.S. and the world;
• scarcity and higher prices of fossil fuels will not limit our use of them;
• the influence of CO₂ from fossil fuels on global warming is likely to be the limiting factor;
• to keep atmospheric CO₂ levels from increasing above about 750 ppm by 2050 will require about 10 TW of power from carbon-free sources; to stabilize at 550 ppm will require about 20 TW of carbon-free power;
• these quantities of power are comparable to and greater than the current worldwide consumption of energy resources;
• except for solar, none of the carbon-free, renewable energy resources by itself can conceivably provide 10-20 TW;
• unless there is an R&D effort akin to the Manhattan Project or the Apollo Space Program, beginning immediately, we are betting that the predicted effects of global warming will not come to pass-a high stakes bet that, if lost, would be catastrophic.

Lewis’s lecture brings together in one place a great deal of information that can be useful to teachers. From the seemingly simple task of tabulating many different energy resources, such as barrels of petroleum, tons of coal, and cubic feet of natural gas, in the same units, either J or W, to the far more complicated thinking required to assess the impacts of different technologies that do not emit carbon, there are many lessons that students can learn.

Assignments might ask students to research the Web for data (such as the World Energy Assessment, http://www.undp.org/energy/weaover2004.htm, or the U.S. Energy Information Administration, http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/overview.html) and then assess trends by graphing, evaluate the accuracy of data in Lewis’s lecture or another source, or apply scientific thinking to the data in some other way. Something as simple as a discussion of the tremendously large quantities of energy and power that human society uses would be very instructive. Students could verify Lewis’s statement that if nuclear power alone were to provide the 10 TW of non-carbon energy needed in 2050, a new 1 GW plant would need to be built somewhere in the world every other day. Or they could show that based on photovoltaics at 10% efficiency, generating 3 GW (the U.S. share) would require roughly the same area (1.7% of the U.S.) as the interstate highway system. Another student exercise could be to research methods for carbon sequestration. Students could be divided into groups that would be assigned different roles (oil company engineers, environmentalists, government regulators, general public) and these groups could then debate whether to site a carbon sequestration operation in the local area.

Another beneficial effect of classroom discussions of the science and technology of energy is that more than just students can be affected. There is at present a serious lack of interest in science on the part of politicians and the public (2). Lewis’s message, and statements from many other scientists and scientific societies, strongly present the case that business as usual in energy matters is a decision to ignore real problems that will affect all of world society (3). As our students learn more about these issues they will pass along their knowledge to many others. They may even be inspired to attempt to address the problems through the political process.

Most important of all is that energy issues will open for students vistas of the importance of chemistry in addressing major problems of our time and our society-problems that they themselves could work on if they became chemists. Chemistry may be a mature science, but that does not make it irrelevant or unimportant. Indeed its very maturity means that chemistry has tremendous potential to contribute to the good of everyone in the world. As I have said before, that is a strong motivating factor for getting students interested in chemistry (4). It is also an important message that all of us need to reiterate not only to students but to any member of the public who will listen-and even somehow to those who are not interested!

Literature Cited

1. Lewis, Nathan S. http://nsl.caltech.edu/energy.html (accessed May 2008); see also Lewis, Nathan S.; Nocera, Daniel G. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 2006, 103(43), 15729-15735.

2. Moore, J. W. J. Chem. Educ. 2008, 85, 331.

3. Smalley, Richard E. New York Times, September 2, 2003, p F3; Whitesides, George M.; Crabtree, George W. Science 2007, 315, 796-798. (See also the review of Gusher of Lies, p 905.)

3. Moore, J. W. J. Chem. Educ. 2006, 83, 1255; 2007, 84, 743; 2007, 84, 1239.

Sustainable Energy Coalition Homepage

from Erica Jacobsen, JCE High School Editor

If you haven’t visited it before, chemistry.com (accessed Jun 2008) probably isn’t quite what you think. The Web site does focus on chemistry—of the matchmaking kind. The online dating service uses an algorithm created by Helen E. Fisher, an anthropologist who has studied the neural chemistry of people in love (1). Users answer a few hundred questions to form a “personality profile”, which is then used to match them to users with a similar “chemistry”.

Did you know that there are matchmakers on the Journal of Chemical Education staff as well? They may not realize it themselves, but the editors that plan and lay out the Journal are experts at matching up articles with a similar chemistry (literally) in every issue. As articles accepted for publication progress through the system, each is tentatively slotted into a particular issue. Matches are made between related articles if possible, and you’ll commonly find them juxtaposed in an issue. So it’s no accident that you’ll find a collection of ideas that favor the sweet tooth in the August issue of JCE. After JCE Classroom Activity #97 “The Sweeter Side of Density” was scheduled for the August issue, other related articles popped up. Two of them are of special interest to high school teachers. You’ll find them on the pages flanking the Activity sheet.

In the Activity, students first measure the density of various sugar solutions. But then Davis and Henry give this common density lab procedure a twist—students dye the solutions and are challenged to devise a method to combine these miscible solutions to make a multi-colored, layered heterogeneous mixture. After a successful layering, they take it a few steps further by predicting the density and color that will result if they then mix the layers. While reading the preview copy of this issue, I was pleased to discover the matchmaking that JCE editors did between the Activity and the article that follows. Peterson’s article “Measuring the Density of a Sugar Solution: A General Chemistry Experiment Using a Student-Prepared Unknown” is a great extension for students that have tried the Classroom Activity. See the pointer for more details. Laura describes a third sugary article in her Take below.

You won’t find sugar in Phifer and Gmurczyk’s article. Instead they describe more matchmaking—between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the American Chemical Society, and educators to help K–12 schools manage their chemical stores and to safely dispose of any unnecessary chemicals. Please find out how you can help with this important “Schools Chemical Cleanout Campaign” (SC3).

Laura’s Take on the Issue
from Laura Slocum, JCEHigh School Associate Editor

It is August already, but it just can’t be really! School starts soon for many of us, including me. I will be finalizing my first month of lesson plans while attending the Biennial Conference on Chemical Education at the end of July.

Since 1998, I always start the first day of class collecting data to help teach my students how to make data tables, analyze both individual and class data, and review their data and procedure for errors. This year I am going to use ideas that Canaes, Brancalion, Rossi, and Rath describe in their article “Using Candy Samples To Learn about Sampling Techniques and Statistical Data Evaluation”.

Because I have smaller class sizes and therefore smaller data sets, I will not go into mean-based statistical analysis as the authors do. My students use median-based statistical analysis techniques, line plots, and box plots throughout the year on all quantitative labs. Students have commented that statistical analysis was challenging at first, but that they found it rewarding as they gained a better understanding of it with practice. Ideas proposed by Canaes, et al. will give my students the opportunity to further explore data acquisition and analysis and also reward them with a bit of a treat at the end of the activity—some M&M’s to take with them, of course, never to eat in the lab!

Literature Cited
1. Tierney, J. Findings: Hitting It Off, Thanks to Algorithms of Love. The New York Times, Jan 29, 2008 (accessed Jun 2008).

JCE High School Chemed Learning Information Center (CLIC)

from Laura Slocum, JCE High School Associate Editor

What could the three items in the title possibly have in common? For me, they represent three of the 24 different projects my students turned in February 14. In the July 2007 issue of the Journal of Chemical Education, Ami LeFevre shared her Element Project, Bouquets of Periodicity, within a longer report about the ACS High School Day Program.

In that month’s “Especially for High School Teachers” column, I wrote about how I looked forward to trying it in my classroom. This project was one of the captivating moments that carried me through the school year. I am so glad that I incorporated it into my curriculum. The students, faculty, parents, and visitors to our school were really impressed as well. These projects adorn various desks around the school and are even rotated at the school secretary’s desk in the main lobby—at present the lanthanide series in the fish bowl occupies that place of honor. Visitors to the school comment about the creative talents of our students and find the information on the projects “quite amazing”. These projects have also been good conversation starters on Grandparent’s Day and with the parents of prospective students.

For this project, students worked in assigned groups of three, with various levels of ability and creativity. I used Ami’s broad description and most of her assignment directions. I let the students choose their element group—all 18 groups were available and chosen, some twice, including the lanthanide and actinide series. Once the projects were completed and turned in, the students evaluated each team member individually, including themselves, and only shared their evaluations with me. I always incorporate individual evaluations into group projects and my students have commented that they find this quite helpful. It allows each student to openly and honestly share thoughts and opinions about themselves and the other group members in a non-threatening manner. The evaluation is also incorporated into each individual’s project grade.

Each of us needs new and fresh ideas; this was the special one for me this year. My students for next year are already talking about this project—one student has requested Group 14! When asked what she had planned for the final project, she just smiled and said, “It’s a surprise!!!” That kind of a statement is music to a teacher’s heart. It makes me want to assign this project the first day of class, just to see what she does with it.

There are additional photos, project directions, a grading rubric, and a student evaluation form online in the supplemental material. Those of you attending this summer’s Biennial Conference on Chemical Education (BCCE) at Indiana University will get to see many of these. This project will also be part of a talk in the Survivor Skills for 1st to 5th Year Chemistry Teachers symposium at the BCCE.

The July 2008 issue of JCE contains information about the much-anticipated CD-ROM containing the first 50 JCE Classroom Activities. Classroom Activities are awesome, and every teacher I meet is so grateful for the thoughtful and thorough manner in which Erica Jacobsen oversees their publication. People have often asked why there are not even more of them. I know that many of you do some really great things in your classrooms: if you shared them, others would benefit greatly. Please consider it—Erica and I are more than willing to help you put together your first Activity or Classroom Activity Connection, such as the Connection in July’s issue. Just email us and ask Erica or me.

JCE High School Chemed Learning Information Center (CLIC)

If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. Thomas Jefferson, letter to Charles Yancey, 1816

Thinking is hard. Writing is hard because it requires thinking. Both thinking and writing involve time and concentration-commodities that these days are hard to come by. Sometimes it seems that nobody has time for, or even cares about, thinking-or for that matter concentrating on any single task. According to Steve Jobs, eBooks will fail because “people don’t read anymore. Forty percent of the people in the U.S. read one book or less last year” (1). Presumably these people are busy viewing videos on their iPhones, listening to music on their iPods, driving their SUVs, or all three at once.

Next month is our summer reading issue, with reviews of more than a dozen books that would be valuable to read in your leisure time. But before you start on those books, I recommend Susan Jacoby’s The Age of American Unreason (2). Though not explicitly about chemistry or science, it has a lot to say about science, teaching, and public understanding.

Jacoby’s condemnation of “unreason” is much broader, but she specifically documents ignorance about science. America is the only developed country in which evolution by natural selection is not viewed as accepted, noncontroversial science. Jacoby refuses to accept religious fundamentalism as the sole reason, citing many non-fundamentalist dismissals of scientific consensus. She argues that ignorance of evolution, and worse, of science and its principles and modes of thought, are the main problem. In support she quotes NSF studies revealing that more than two thirds of Americans do not know that DNA is the key to heredity, 90% do not understand radiation, and 20% think the sun revolves around the earth. She also cites poor performance on examinations that compare U.S. students with those from other countries. A recent poll by the Chicago Museum of Science and Industry does nothing to contradict Jacoby-nearly half of Americans could not name any scientist as a role model for today’s youth (3).

Jacoby attributes lack of knowledge of science to “a stunning failure of American public schooling at the elementary and secondary levels”, but I think there is more to it than that. To a considerable degree intellectuals in general and scientists in particular have gotten too busy with their own pursuits to pay attention to maintaining the infrastructure undergirds science and its contributions to society. We scientists have not been as aggressive as we should, for example, in recruiting top students to careers in teaching at the K-12 level and providing such students with the scientific background they need to excite their students about science. Until both scientists and the general public begin to afford K-12 teaching the respect and importance that it deserves, we are likely to continue to spiral downward in quality rather than soar to new heights.

Can we do anything about this? In her final chapter, Jacoby suggests that the U.S. may have arrived at a teachable moment as a result of many failures of government policies that have ignored facts and scientific consensus. Jacoby argues that solutions to our problems will not be technological but rather must come from changing the way we think-and how much time we spend thinking. Jacoby wants politicians to provide leadership and tell us that we “have become too lazy to learn what we need to know to make sound public decisions”. This is going to be very difficult, if not impossible, for politicians to do unless those of us in the trenches of the educational system help our students to learn how to think as scientists think, how to apply rational thought to everyday situations, and why doing this is crucial to a free society. In the words of Daniel Webster’s eulogy for John Adams and Thomas Jefferson in 1826, our country was founded on the basis of “a newly awakened, and an unconquerable spirit of free inquiry, and by a diffusion of knowledge throughout the community”. That is, the founders based a country on the spirit of science. We need to maintain that spirit when we teach science.

I encourage you to read Jim Roach’s Commentary (which also appears in this blog). Its title begins “Als Ik Kan”, Flemish words for “to the best of my ability”. Roach has resolved, and encourages all of us to resolve, to teach to the best of our ability and to motivate our students to learn and work to the best of their abilities. I encourage all who read this to serve as models of rational, scientific thinking and create learning environments in which our students are encouraged-even required-to apply rational thought to both science and their daily lives. Set aside some time to think quietly and carefully about this.

Literature Cited

1. Jobs, Steven P., quoted in the New York Times, January 21, 2008.

2. Jacoby, Susan The Age of American Unreason Pantheon Books: New York 2008.

3. Museum of Science and Industry, Chicago The State of Science in America, March 20, 2008; http://www.stateofscience.org/ (accessed April 2008).

Science versus Antiscience?

Als Ik Kan is the message in the logo of Gustav Stickley, creator of the Mission style of furniture. Loosely translated from Flemish it means “to the best of my ability”. Jim D. Roach, Emporia State University, KS uses Als Ik Kan as the theme for his call for greater dedication by everyone, teachers, students, and others, to improving science education. A summary of Roach’s piece follows. The full text is available here: jce2008p0768.pdf.

Colleges and universities have become little more than student-factories; turning out products that are inferior or worse yet, obsolete when they walk off the commencement stage. As a physical chemist I can appreciate the importance of technology in both teaching and research. But, proficiency with technology does not guarantee good teaching. Perhaps we should all use a little more chalk and a little less tech; spend more time training students to think and less time telling them where to click. I have a New Year’s resolution; a new strategy that I plan to unveil at the start of the spring semester (and at the beginning of every semester thereafter). I’m hoping that dedication and passion are contagious! My standards are going up; my time spent with students is going to increase. Students will have excellence demanded of them and excellence demonstrated to them…Als Ik Kan…to the best of my ability.