The extent of instrumentation use in undergraduate chemistry courses has increased considerably over the years. Malina and Nakhleh are very engaged with evaluating students’ use of instrumentation and students’ understanding of the concepts studied. Today’s students are exposed to many more types of instruments than were those of previous generations. However, the theoretical framework that affects learning at this level is only just beginning to be developed and is an excellent chemical education research area to pursue. In my opinion preparing students to be chemists centers on their ability to use and understand “modern” instrumentation. I know that my experience with instrumentation was very limited—I was in graduate school before I touched anything beyond a microscope. Today, more and more students are expected to understand the technology that is at hand. Our job therefore is to identify what foundation needs to be laid at the secondary level so that our students will be prepared for success in this world.

According to Boschmann, “Chemists have a long history of using technology for teaching and learning”, and it is well established that students learn better when they are actively engaged in the subject matter. I know that many teachers currently use probeware in many of their classroom activities. While probe use appears to be more popular at the secondary school level than in the colleges, we need to know more about its value and future effectiveness. The ability to take data much faster and more accurately are two advantages noted by students for why they like using the updated instrumentation. Computer-based probes and a programmable image acquisition system are also mentioned in this issue of the Journal. In the article by Ogren, Henry, Fletcher, and Kelly, examples of how to use LabVIEW computer stations are given. Teaching chemistry via distance education has always been a problem when it came to having students perform labs. The Boschmann article addresses how some of these concerns are being met using currently available technology. If you are considering teaching a beginning chemistry course via the Web, you might want to purchase the 7th edition of the JCE General Chemistry Collection. New in the edition are pH titration simulator and two programs very appropriate for high school students, Inorganic Nomenclature and Writing Electron Dot Structures.

Other interesting reports that you can find in this issue are the reflections by Mary Harris on receiving a presidential award for Secondary Science Teaching. Many of you qualify—or know of someone who qualifies—for a presidential award. According to Mary these awards will no longer be given every year as they have been. It’s too late for the secondary award applications for 2003, so you have over a year to consider your submissions for the next secondary award that will be given in 2005.

A commentary by Holme calls for interested volunteers to contact him to help write new questions for the ACS DivCHED exams. Writing good multiple choice questions for an ACS exam takes real skill and hard work. Holme’s article describes the process of writing, selecting, and validating the questions that are chosen for the final version of each exam. Getting involved in writing exams at the national level is an excellent choice to further your career, so you might want to consider Holme’s request.

It soon will be summertime so don’t forget to check out the summer reading suggestions. The reviewers have suggested a variety of choices. Coppola recommends that books that go beyond chemistry or even science be in clear view to our students. If some books on your shelves reflect your personal choice, this may lead to insightful conversations with students. Don’t forget to check out the Web sites in News & Announcements to get the updates on local, state, regional, national, and international meetings on target for this summer. See you in July at ChemEd 03 in Auburn!

Literature Cited

1. Scerri, E. R. J. Chem. Educ. 2003, 80, 468.