Sponsored Content

Intermarkets' Privacy Policy

Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!

Recent Entries
Absent Friends
GnuBreed 2024
Captain Hate 2023
moon_over_vermont 2023
westminsterdogshow 2023
Ann Wilson(Empire1) 2022
Dave In Texas 2022
Jesse in D.C. 2022
OregonMuse 2022
redc1c4 2021
Tami 2021
Chavez the Hugo 2020
Ibguy 2020
Rickl 2019
Joffen 2014
AoSHQ Writers Group
A site for members of the Horde to post their stories seeking beta readers, editing help, brainstorming, and story ideas. Also to share links to potential publishing outlets, writing help sites, and videos posting tips to get published. Contact OrangeEnt for info:
maildrop62 at proton dot me
Cutting The Cord And Email Security
Moron Meet-Ups

Saturday Afternoon Chess thread 11-07-2020 | Main | Saturday Overnight Open Thread (11/7/20)
November 07, 2020

Science isn't dead, but it is ailing - part 3 [Jay Guevara]


With apologies in advance to non-STEM types, this is going to be a rant posting about the dire state of science education, focusing in this case on chemistry.

Most people hate chemistry, and on meeting a chemist, commonly say it was one of their worst subjects. It's not hard to understand why. Chemistry courses and textbooks almost invariably start with Schrödinger's wave equation. Now there's no better way to put hung-over 18 year old undergraduates off the subject than to begin with something that chemists almost never use. It's pure intellectual pretension to start with the wave equation, which in any case is physics more than chemistry. (Chemists use the solutions to the wave equation, but not the wave equation itself, as it can only be solved in closed form for the hydrogen atom. Pfft.)

Chemistry is about the structure and reactions of matter. Some compounds are compounds are commonly found as gases, some as liquids, some as solids, some stink, some are blue, some burst into flame in air, some are completely inert, some are pulled into magnetic fields, other pushed out. Establishing a conceptual framework for understanding and thinking about these observations, and making predictions about them, now THAT is chemistry.

A phenomenological approach is a better place to start. For example, "copper sulfate is blue, and pulled into a magnetic field. Addition of a reducing agent gives a colorless compound that is pushed out of a magnetic field. Why? How can we understand these observations? Answering this and related questions is the subject of this course."
What about electrons, protons, and bonds then? "A chemical compound consists of a framework of positively charged nuclei immersed in a sea of negatively charged particles (called electrons) that slosh over and in particular between the nuclei. Think of a tray of water, where the electrons correspond to the water. Some nuclei attract electrons more than others. We call that "electronegativity," and it corresponds to making one end of the tray deeper than the other. Now in fact, this is pretty much how most chemists actually think about chemical compounds. It's a very simple treatment with a lot of legs. (Consider that it can later even be easily extended to electronic transitions, which correspond to rocking the tray at a resonant frequency.)

So far, no mention of orbitals or the like. Throw in some bangs and booms lecture demonstrations, and you've got the rapt attention of said hung-over undergraduates. What's more, this type of treatment closely tracks how chemistry actually developed conceptually. Only a bit later posit the existence of orbitals (and relegate solution of the wave equation to an appendix, treating it in detail in upper division courses).

One of the Guevara spawn had a high school chemistry text that took exactly the opposite tack. Page N talked about atoms, and page N+2 moved on to glycosidic linkages in the nucleotides of DNA. WTF? Were 500 pages inadvertently omitted between these two topics? Junior's chemistry teacher told me that they used pH as a qualitative measure of acidity (how would you rate the acidity on a scale of 1 to 10, or in this case 0 to 14? In essence, treating pH as an ordinal number) because they didn't teach the mole concept. It was too difficult. What? The mole concept and pH were too difficult, but glycosidic linkages were no problem? Junior did well in the class because he has almost photographic memory, and he simply memorized everything, but it put him off the subject for life. Why do American kids eschew science? It's a mystery.

More later on science (and math) education.

digg this
posted by Open Blogger at 07:30 PM

| Access Comments

Recent Comments
mindful webworker - freedom's just another word : "[i]...hundreds of people dope-sick, smoking fentan ..."

mikeski: "[i]The doctors suggested that Pollock should apply ..."

Doof: "[i]Little guy knows his machines Posted by: Don B ..."

Bilwis Devourer of Innocent Souls, I'm starvin' over here: "If that kid isn't on JD's payroll, he should be. B ..."

Tonypete: ""Look, we screwed up and only partially killed you ..."

OrangeEnt: "If we end up in WWIII, those pushing for it should ..."

the same harm reduction advocates: "[i]Harm reduction advocates saw Measure 110 as [.. ..."

Idaho Spudboy: "Meanwhile, in Ukraine: 1. No big battlefield news ..."

"Perfessor" Squirrel: "Canadian Doctors Admit Covid ‘Booster’ ..."

Anonosaurus Wrecks, Is this the real life? Is this just fantasy? [/s] [/b] [/i]: "Canadian Doctors Admit Covid ‘Booster’ ..."

mindful webworker - bemazed : "And so, here we are again. Amazing. Hi. ..."

TRex: "Good evening horde. On to the content (thanks WD) ..."

Recent Entries

Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
Powered by
Movable Type 2.64