Secondary School Feature Articles

* Orbital Models Made of Plastic Soda Bottles, by Vyacheslav V. Samoshin, p. 985.

* Experimentally Determining the Molecular Weight of Carbon Dioxide Using a Mylar Balloon, by Barbara Albers Jackson and David J. Crouse, p. 997.

History in High School Chemistry: Why and How?

In this issue, William Jensen concludes his three-part series on "Logic, History, and the Teaching of Chemistry" with a discussion of "One Chemical Revolution or Three?" beginning on page 961. Parts I and II of the series appeared in the June and July issues, respectively (1).

The series is based on invited keynote lectures that Jensen presented at the 57th annual summer conference of the New England Association of Chemistry Teachers.

In his opening remarks, Jensen noted that there are two general approaches to history of chemistry: "the use of biographical sketches and humorous anecdotes as a means of humanizing chemistry for students" or "a case study of either the scientific method or of the impact of science and technology on society." Almost every introductory chemistry teacher and most high school textbooks use the former approach, but the latter is usually limited to college courses in the history and philosophy of science and technology. Jensen, however, suggests that there is a third approach: to use the history of chemistry "to logically organize the current concepts and models of chemistry, while simultaneously revealing many of their underlying assumptions and interrelationships" (Part I, p 679).

The National Science Education Standards (2) and Benchmarks for Science Literacy (3) both call for including historical perspectives in the science curriculum. The NCES calls for the development of student understanding of science as a human endeavor, the nature of scientific knowledge, and historical perspectives (p 200). Two reasons for including some history are cited in BSL: history provides specific examples of how science works and some historical episodes are of great significance to our cultural heritage. The American Chemical Society Education Division has produced a resource manual that provides suggestions for using the standards effectively to modify instruction (4). In Chapter 12, Mary Virginia Orna provides some concrete and useful examples of how the history of science can be worked into high school chemistry classes. (The manual, which includes an introduction and 16 chapters ranging from inquiry activities through assessment, can be purchased from ACS Educational Products, see reference 4 ).

All this may be good, but what relevance does it have for a busy high school teacher who is trying to follow a curriculum bloated with diverse and, to the student, seemingly unrelated topics? The approach suggested by Jensen appears to offer direction in finding a solution to the dilemma. Using the historical development of an understanding of chemistry at the molar, molecular, and electrical levels, he proposes that for each level there are a composition and structure dimension, an energy dimension, and a time dimension (Table 1, p 680). Considering the levels as rows of a three-by-three matrix and the dimensions as columns, several of the nine cells include ideas not discussed in most first-year high school chemistry courses. For example, the composition and structure dimension of the electrical level is described with "electronic" formulas such as Lewis structures and electronic configuration schemes. Variations in composition lead to ions and isotopes, and variations in structure provide an explanation for excited states. Using Jensen's structure, one could construct a response to the "Why do we need to know this stuff?" question on historical grounds, although proposed logical structure certainly has much deeper implications for teaching and learning chemistry. In the article Jensen suggests that many of the topics that appear in the matrix are not covered in high school courses, but if second-year and Advanced Placement courses are considered, a surprising number are covered. Throughout the series, he provides example after example of how an understanding of the history of chemistry can be used to provide structure.

In his March and April editorials, John Moore discussed the results of a survey of high school students (5) and challenged teachers to make individual decisions and apply creative energy to make standards real and effective (6). Considering the suggestions of Jensen is a good way to begin seeking an answer to the question of why and how the history of chemistry might be used effectively in a standards-based curriculum. This series of articles can be a great help in thinking about what we teach and why, but it also contains a large amount of historical information that otherwise is accessible only from multiple sources.

Literature Cited

1. Jensen, W. B. Does Chemistry Have a Logical Structure? J. Chem. Educ. 1998, 75, 679-987; Can We Unmuddle the Chemistry Textbook? J. Chem. Educ. 1998, 75, 817-828.

2. National Research Council. National Science Education Standards; National Academy Press: Washington DC, 1996; pp 200-204.

3. American Association for the Advancement of Science. Benchmarks for Science Literacy; Oxford University Press: New York, 1993; pp 237-239

4. Chemistry in the National Science Education Standards; American Chemical Society Education Division: Washington, DC, 1997. (ACS Education Products, P.O. Box 2537, Kearneysville, WV 25430, 1-800/109-0423).

5. Moore, J. W. J. Chem. Educ. 1998, 75, 255.

6. Moore, J. W. J. Chem. Educ. 1998, 75, 391.