Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 08:25:47 EDT From: Donald Rosenthal Subject: Short Questions for Paper 6 CHEMCONF '96 New Initiatives in Chemical Education An On-Line Symposium, June 3 to July 19, 1996 Sponsored by the American Chemical Society's Division of Chemical Education Organized by: Donald Rosenthal, Department of Chemistry, Clarkson University, and Tom O'Haver, Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, The University of Maryland at College Park. It is Monday, June 24, 1996. Papers 6 to 9 are now available and may be retrieved from the World Wide Web. (The URL is http://www.wam.umd.edu/~toh/ChemConf96.html) >From 8 AM Eastern Daylight Saving Time (EDST) today until 8 AM EDST on Tuesday, June 24 you have an opportunity to ask SHORT QUESTIONS about Paper 6 - Recent Applications of Hyperactive Chemistry and the World-Wide Web: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Towards an Integrated Chemistry Information Environment ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ by Henry S. Rzepa, Omer Casher, Christopher Leach and Peter Murray-Rust SHORT QUESTIONS should be sent to: CHEMCONF@UMDD.UMD.EDU or CHEMCONF@UMDD.BITNET Such messages inform both authors and subscribers. The authors and subscribers will have at least a week to consider the questions and frame their responses. (Authors should be informed of typographical or other errors by sending them personal mail and NOT via CHEMCONF) Remember, DISCUSSION OF PAPER 6 WILL OCCUR ON JULY 1 AND JULY 2 and NOT BETWEEN June 24 and June 28. The SHORT QUESTION schedule is: Monday, June 24 - Short Questions about Paper 6 Tuesday, June 25 - Paper 7 Wednesday, June 26 - Paper 8 Thursday, June 27 - Paper 9 Donald Rosenthal Symposium Co-Chair and Chair, Committee on Computers in Chemical Education Clarkson University Phone: 315-265-9242 E-mail: ROSEN1@CLVM.CLARKSON.EDU ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 16:06:38 -0400 From: Brian Tissue Subject: P6 - BT - SQ - development tools, chemical markup language Henry, et al., The molecular visualization tools are looking great! What are the learning curves for developing curriculum material in VRML and Java? Are there likely to be any development tools available in the future for developing VRML files from say *.pdb files? The analogy that comes to mind for development tools are programs like Mapedit or Map This for creating clickable image maps with GIF files. Is the chemical markup language (CML) you propose basically an open data format for chemical information? How likely is it that software and instrument vendors will adopt an open format? Seems like every program has its own propriety file format, and moving from one program to another using RTF, GIF, etc., always loses information. Are there any prospects for a browser that supports CML, or will it require a plug-in? As far as I know the popular web browsers still have not implemented the specifications for displaying equations. Brian *************************************************************** Prof. Brian M. Tissue phone: (540) 231-3786 Department of Chemistry FAX: (540) 231-3255 Virginia Tech e-mail: tissue@vt.edu Blacksburg, VA 24061-0212 http://www.chem.vt.edu/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 22:18:00 +0000 From: "Rzepa,Henry" Subject: Re: P6 - BT - SQ - development tools, chemical markup language >Henry, et al., >The molecular visualization tools are looking great! What are the learning >curves for developing curriculum material in VRML and Java? Are there >likely to be any development tools available in the future for developing >VRML files from say *.pdb files? The analogy that comes to mind for >development tools are programs like Mapedit or Map This for creating >clickable image maps with GIF files. There are several ways of doing so 1. Chem3D from CambridgeSoft offer a VRML filter (actually Applescript) 2. We use our own EyeChem suite, based on Explorer, and hence pretty much VRML compliant. The EyeChem modules are publically available. 3. Brickmann's group offer an on-line pdb to VRML converter. Its also very good. 4. These are all VRML 1.0 methods. Expect VRML 2.0 to appear quite soon. >Is the chemical markup language (CML) you propose basically an open data >format for chemical information? How likely is it that software and >instrument vendors will adopt an open format? Seems like every program has >its own propriety file format, and moving from one program to another using >RTF, GIF, etc., always loses information. Yes, that is an on-going problem. CML is unique in integrating into the "publishing" paradigm. All previous file formats have been developed from database and modelling paradigms. Having said that, we have a major initiative under way called the "Open Molecule Foundation", which we hope will kick start the use of CML. More soon. >Are there any prospects for a browser that supports CML, or will it require >a plug-in? As far as I know the popular web browsers still have not >implemented the specifications for displaying equations. >Brian The simple answer is we hope YES. But I cannot really give too many details, since they are still being thrashed out. Watch this space! Suffice to say we have demo software here which is already capable of browsing CML files. As for Math, there is already a Java applet that does this! Combined with e.g a Java based browser such as HotJava, and you in effect could have a math browser very easily. I have not taken a look at Amaya, the new HTML 3.2 browser from W3O, bu tI expect this implements Math. Henry Rzepa. +44 171 594 5774 (Office) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 08:36:16 -0400 From: George Long Subject: Re: P6 - GL - SQ; Standards Do you think it would be worthwhile for some group, such as the ACS, or a subset of this group, (CCCE) to develop a set of standards for sending chemical information over the web? HTML 3.0 is not even standard yet, some browsers support all features, and some don't - and some offer aditional features, like MS explorer. I find a large discrepency in how VRML plugins work as well, etc. etc. **************************************************************************** George R Long, Ph.D. Department of Chemistry Indiana University of Pennsylvania Indiana, PA 15705 grlong@grove.iup.edu 412-357-2575 Our lives are merely trees of possibilities - Marc Bolan **************************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 15:13:08 +0100 From: "Rzepa, Henry" Subject: Re: P6 - GL - SQ; Standards >Do you think it would be worthwhile for some group, such as the ACS, or a >subset of this group, (CCCE) to develop a set of standards for sending >chemical information over the web? HTML 3.0 is not even standard yet, some >browsers support all features, and some don't - and some offer aditional >features, like MS explorer. I find a large discrepency in how VRML plugins >work as well, etc. etc. There has been a group in operation, for well over two years now. Called the chemical MIME discussion group, they have a home page on http://www.ch.ic.ac.uk/chemime/ These particular standards have been widely adopted throughout the chemical community, and we have links into the CPEP IUPAC committee (Committee on Printed and Electronic Publications). We also have an initiative in CML, which is basically HTML with chemistry, and another with Java. The point about ACS or another "interested party" formulating a group is one we have considered. We feel it is particularly important to be seen as impartial, and with no particular axe to grind. As for VRML, there is a "Molecular Inventor" component, although this is pretty much being driven by SGI. How VRML plug-ins interface is I think totally beyond the control of anyone, although there is a VRML steering group, which nevertheless seems to be floating away from the W3C, the oversee-er of HTML develoments. The short answer is that yes, the problem you raise has been addressed for several years now, and there are ongoing initiatives to develop it. I see no no at this stage to formulate further working parties. Dr Henry Rzepa, Dept. Chemistry, Imperial College, LONDON SW7 2AY; rzepa@ic.ac.uk; Tel (44) 171 594 5774; Fax: (44) 171 594 5804. URL: http://www.ch.ic.ac.uk/rzepa/ (Eudora Pro 3.0) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 12:40:01 -0500 From: CHEMISTRY Subject: P7 - GM - SQ Computers versus TAs? In Paper 7, Stanley Smith and Iris Stovall, smith@aries.scs.uiuc.edu stovall@aries.scs.uiuc.edu, write: > Arguments for and Against Computerized Quizzes >There are also reasons why computerized quizzes may not be > successful in all cases. > The opportunity for cheating increases enormously. Cheating is a serious word. Are you planning to seek disciplinary punishment for students found tricking the computerized system? If you made the quizzes Pass-Fail, would you diminish the studentUs motivation to cheat, since a mediocre performance would not hurt the course grade of the student? > Administrators may form the opinion that students now need > fewer hours in class, since one of the large time consumers in > discussions has now been removed. Considering all of the disadvantages you pointed out in this section with the TA system, would this be such a bad thing? My experience, as a student, as a TA myself, and, in a previous job, as a supervisor of TAs, is that the TA system produces a poor quality educational experience for the students and wastes the time of the TA, too. When you designed your computerized system, did you have in mind a goal of diminishing the need for TAs? Why do you think that an administrator who argued that fewer TAs are needed would be wrong? Even if one accepts that TAs serve some useful functions, does not the computerized instruction in fact lessen the need for them? ******************************************************* Gerald Morine, Chemistry Dept., Bemidji State University, Bemidji, Minnesota 56601-2699 USA gmchem@vax1.bemidji.msus.edu http://bsuweb.bemidji.msus.edu/~chemdept/home.html ****************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 21:51:19 -0600 From: Frank Jenkins Subject: P7 - FJ - SQ Management systems Hi On reading your paper and seeing some of the figures (and based upon my experience with the Falcon Chemistry Management system), I was brought to wonder what management system (or which FCM version) was being used? My experience is that once one finds some good quality software, a management system is mandatory to monitor and/or assess student use. Frank -- Dr. Frank Jenkins, Frank Jenkins Science Dept. Head 3516 - 104 Street Ross Sheppard High School Edmonton AB T6J 2J7 13546 - 111 Avenue fjenkins@oanet.com Edmonton AB T5M 2P2 HP(403) 434-9610 HF(403) 436-3745 WP(403) 454-8576 WF(403) 452-7563 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 07:17:42 EDT From: Donald Rosenthal Subject: P7 - DR - SQ - Toolbox, Simulations and Time Spent P7 - DR - SQ - Tool Box, Simulations and Time Spent In the Chemist's Tool Box section you state: > From our experience, these programs are used only if they are > specifically assigned by the instructor. .... > we have not seen students use these tools as much as we would like. Under Electronic Homework in Organic: > In a spring 1996 survey, 87% of the students in the class rated these > lessons as "Helpful" or "Very Helpful" a. Does the Tool Box provide information which the student obtains from other sources? Is it intended for enrichment or remediation? b. Did those students who used the Tool Box materials find them to be "Helpful" or "Very Helpful"? c. Why do you think the students did not use these tools very much? ===================================================================== In discussing Interactive Video Lessons (Laboratory Simulations) you state: > This type of instruction ... (allows) students to interact with video-based > experiments which are difficult to do in traditional laboratories and > which reduce student exposure to potentially hazardous materials or > procedures. Students may repeat lessons as often as they want ... > Replacing actual experiments with computer simulations is contreversial. > ... (reducing) the quantity of waste generated > ... experiments that can be done better with the aid of computers. Are some of these experiments more "efficient" because more data can be "obtained" than would be possible if the experiments were performed in the laboratory? More sophisticated data analysis might be possible and students could learn more about analyzing the results of experiments. ===================================================================== Do you know how much time per week a typical general chemistry student spent using these networked instructional materials: a. In the lecture portion of the course? b. In the laboratory portion of the course? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 09:24:47 -0500 From: Stan Smith Subject: Re: P7 - FJ - SQ Management systems >On reading your paper and seeing some of the figures (and based upon my >experience with the Falcon Chemistry Management system), I was brought to >wonder what management system (or which FCM version) was being used? > My experience is that once one finds some good quality software, a >management system is mandatory to monitor and/or assess student use. > I agree that a management system which makes it easy for students to access assigned lessons and for the instructor to track student use helps make instructional software a required part of a course. The Windows based management system we are using now is one we wrote and is optimized for our instructional computing environment. We are working on a generalized version which might be useful other places. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 09:43:58 -0500 From: Stan Smith Subject: Re: P7 - DR - SQ - Toolbox, Simulations and Time Spent >b. Did those students who used the Tool Box materials find them to be > "Helpful" or "Very Helpful"? > >c. Why do you think the students did not use these tools very much? We do not have data on Tool Box use. (Including the automatic collection of such data is on the long list of things to do.) However, students tend not to read books in the library or use software which is not a required part of the course. >Do you know how much time per week a typical general chemistry student >spent using these networked instructional materials: > >a. In the lecture portion of the course? >b. In the laboratory portion of the course? Use varies with both the course and the student. For students who complete all of the work the amount of time can vary by a factor of about 5. The best estimates we have are and average of about 2 hours per week for courses which use electronic homework and on-line notes as part of lecture and a similar amount for lab. Of course, use goes up before exams. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 11:13:24 EDT From: Terrell Wilson Subject: P8-RTW-SQ Personalizing Large Lectures Short questions for the authors of Paper 8: 1. The implication of your paper is that you feel the supplemental instruction (SI) described in your paper is beneficial. If you feel this way, why don't you give it to everybody? 2. It is not clear to me who received the SI. Numbers given in one table place 81 of 190 students in the SI group. Were these simply walk-ins or were they selected in some way? How much SI did they receive? 3. I am a little surprised at the effectiveness you report for SI. (23% F in the non-SI group vs. 1% in the SI group.) Your SI sounds very much like the content of many of the "How to Study" books. Did you use a book, or did you develop your own material? 4. The Chem 109 Data Table contains a column identified as "HSPR." I assume this is High School Percentile Rank or something of that kind. Is this correct? If so, it seems to be a predictor of grade. Do you suppose what you are seeing here is simply that students with higher motivation get higher grades, rather than that SI produces higher grades? (They have made higher grades in the past, and they have sought out SI.) This also simply suggests that HSPR is a better predictor of grade than ACT scores. 5. The bottom line: If your objective is to provide each student with "the dignity of an identity" in the classroom, have you considered simply dropping the large lectures entirely and having your professors teach small groups? Sincerely, Terrell Wilson Department of Chemistry Email: RTWILSON@VMI.EDU Virginia Military Institute Phone: 540/464-7423 Lexington, VA 24450 Fax: 540/464-7261 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 19:18:55 -0700 From: Bob Bruner Subject: P8 - BB - SQ - Statistics for SI success? I am confused about the results presented to show that SI helps. I realize you tried to be concise. I don't necessarily want more numbers; you can address the logical issue. Briefly, it's not obvious to me from what is presented that the data shows what is claimed. There seems to be a "bias". 1. First table (Fall 1995). What is Grade Point Average? Is this the students' overall GPA? (or the average chem grade for those listed?) If the former, it is odd that the GPA is so much higher overall for the SI students. If students in SI have higher GPAs, then one would expect them to do better in Chem. (I realize that the GPA may include the chem grade, so is not totally independent. But the GPA difference is huge. [If we offered a voluntary open study session, I'm sure we would find that students who came did better than those who did not -- even if we adjourned the session at t = 0. The result simply reflects that better (more serious, not necessarily "smarter") students are more likely to come.] The above point presents my basic concern. The following points just expand on that. 2. Same table. Who are SI and non-SI? Was one 200 student section split? If so, how? Again, I'm not so much interested in your experimental design per se, but this relates to my #1. 3. 94-95 109 data (your second table). Same general issue. Grouping by ACT score seems helpful. However, I again note that Mean GPA shows a substantial effect in same direction as mean grade. In the context of my #1, this catches my attention. What is HSPR? Bob Bruner UC Berkeley Extension & Contra Costa College bbruner@uclink4.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 07:18:38 EDT From: Donald Rosenthal Subject: P8-DR-SQ III. Supplemental Instruction (SI) Program P8 - DR - SQ - III. Supplemental Instruction (SI) Program In your paper you state: > One of the 6 chem 109 section had an SI leader (leaders are former students > who are education or science majors). The SI leader works with students > (any and all who show up for SI sessions) at least twice each week . . . ^^^^^^^^ > Attendance varies from between about 10 and 30 students, with about 20 > being the norm. Students with excellent preparation as well as those > who are in need of serious help come to SI. The students who attend SI > experience a small-class atmosphere in which their progress is closely > monitored ... > ... those who participated in the SI sessions received a considerably > higher grade ... than those who did not. > We have 5 chemistry 109 lectures with about 200 students in each section. a. Were there 200 students in the SI section and from 5% to 15% attended any given SI session? Or were some of your students SI students (N=81) and some non-SI students (N=109)? How many SI leaders did you have in your Fall 1995 course? b. Were their some SI students who attended no SI sessions? c. What was the number of sessions which the average SI student attended per week ( 0.25, .5. 1, 2 or something else)? d. Were SI students required to attend recitation sections with a TA? e. Were non-SI students required to attend recitation sections with a TA? f. Do you have any evidence that the SI program has a long term effect (over several years) on student retention and performance or does it merely help students do better in Chem 109? g. What sort of student evaluation does the SI program receive? h. One Table is labelled Fall 1995 SI Data and the other is labelled 1994-95 SI Data. If I understand,there were 81 SI and 109 non-SI students in the Fall 1995 group and 60 SI and 240 non-SI students in the 1994-95 group. These two tables are for different groups of students! Is this correct? Donald Rosenthal Clarkson University rosen1@clvm.clarkson.edu 315-265-9242 ------------------------------� Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 10:40:54 -0500 From: "Iris K. Stovall" Subject: Re: P7 - GM - SQ Computers versus TAs? > >Cheating is a serious word. Are you planning to seek disciplinary >punishment for students found tricking the computerized system? No, we are not planning to seek disciplinary action against students. However, we would like to minimize cheating. > >If you made the quizzes Pass-Fail, would you diminish the >studentUs motivation to cheat, since a mediocre performance >would not hurt the course grade of the student? We currently use a Pass-Fail grading system for labs in some courses. Pass-Fail does diminish, but not eliminate, motivation to cheat. Whether or not Pass-Fail quizzes would be successful depends on an instructor's reason(s) for giving quizzes. If mastery of the material were the only objective, then Pass-Fail quizzes might be helpful to a student's learning. Many instructors use quizzes for other purposes as well. >Considering all of the disadvantages you pointed out in this >section with the TA system, would this be such a bad thing? >My experience, as a student, as a TA myself, and, in a previous job, >as a supervisor of TAs, is that the TA system produces a poor >quality educational experience for the students and wastes the >time of the TA, too. A better educational experience can often be had by students in a classroom of 25-30 students taught by a TA than can be had in a lecture hall with 360 or so students. > >When you designed your computerized system, did you have > in mind a goal of diminishing the need for TAs? The primary goal was to help students learn chemistry and to provide them with the best tools that we can devise for that purpose. > >Why do you think that an administrator who argued that fewer >TAs are needed would be wrong? Even if one accepts that TAs serve >some useful functions, does not the computerized instruction >in fact lessen the need for them? Computers do some things very well. We hope that their use will mean that instructors and TAs have more time to do the things that they do best, such as promote discussion. > >******************************************************* >Gerald Morine, Chemistry Dept., Bemidji State University, >Bemidji, Minnesota 56601-2699 USA gmchem@vax1.bemidji.msus.edu >http://bsuweb.bemidji.msus.edu/~chemdept/home.html >****************************************************** > > Iris K. Stovall -------------------- Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 07:34:48 EDT From: Donald Rosenthal Subject: P9-DR-SQ Use in Other Courses and Library Problems P9- DR - SQ - Use of Your Materials in Other Chemical Literature Courses and Solution of Information Resource Problems 1. You have devoted a lot of time and effort to develop materials which would be invaluable to others teaching Chemical Literature Courses. a. Are other schools using your materials? b. Are students at other schools effectively taking your courses? ===================================================================== 2. Providing adequate library resources is a problem for many schools because of the rapid increase in the amount of information available, budgetary constraints and space limitations in libraries. Do you have any insights about how these problems might be solved? ==================================================================== Donald Rosenthal Clarkson University rosen1@clvm.clarkson.edu 315-265-9242 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 13:03:35 EST From: Rich Taylor Subject: Levels of understanding Colleagues: Picking up on some earlier discussions, I think some of my experiences directing our Honors Program at Miami may be of interest. During one of our evaluation periods, we used some tools to try and assess the states of intellectual development of the Honors students. A nice reference in this regard is from the book by our collaborator: Knowing and reasoning in college : gender-related patterns in students' intellectual development / Marcia B. Baxter Magolda. While there are conclusions galore, a few things that we arrived at may be useful here: 1. High achieving students are not necessarily at higher cognitive levels, they are just very good at operating at their current level. 2. A further objective of our Honors Program evolved into efforts to provide experiences which facilitate movement toward higher levels. I think the early anecdotes about 'unfair questions' speaks to point two. These are the kinds of exercises in critical thinking and integration which combine to assess and develop such development. Professors, who are at more developed levels, see them as easy, others see no relationship to course content. So what to do? Well, it is not feasible to require a certain level of development to elect a course. I would recommend including some discussion of these objectives in the syllabus and then an occasional reference to it in the course. Something like "here is a question which involves developing the kind of skills we ultimately want in the course." They still get mad but it seems tempered a bit when you make it an objective rather than some perceived trick. While many of our Honors Students are not in the sciences, I think the above still has some relevance to our discussions. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Richard T. Taylor; ASSO PROF CHEM 513-529-2826 MIAMI UNIVERSITY RTTAYLOR@MIAMIU.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU OXFORD OH 45056 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 13:30:16 EST From: Rich Taylor Subject: What is our objective? As I examine all of the marvelous and ever-devloping tools for visualization and examination of structure, I began to think about how our methods of instruction might change. During most of this conference, I imagined that the tools being used would provide an enhancement of a textbook approach, so that a drawing in a book could be amplified to better detail until the concept is clear. On the other hand, one can envision sufficient computing power and software so that the marvelous drawings we see are routine. Is this the vision? I've always felt that the flat line drawings we use, while unrealistic, are a marvelous symbolic text. They put a lot of information (in interaction with a trained mind) onto a few lines. Am I caught in the past? Will we be using lines on a page in thirty years, or will everything be fully graphic? Are there any drawbacks to providing this much detail? I always tell my organic students that they need to study with a pencil in their hands, you must reproduce the chemistry to fully understand it. Is there any potential for chemistry becoming a spectator sport because of the differences in display technology? As you see, I have no answers, only questions. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RICHARD T. TAYLOR ASSO DIR HONORS 513-529-1627 ASSO PROF CHEM 513-529-2826 MIAMI UNIVERSITY RTTAYLOR@MIAMIU.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU OXFORD OH 45056 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 13:55:51 -0500 From: CHEMISTRY Subject: Re: What is our objective? In the latest announcement by the conference organizers, it was stated that "Casual Conversation" on these topics might occur over the weekend. Most particpants are probably recreating now but perhpas those remaining might be interested in these "Populist" comments. Recently, Rich Taylor wrote: > I began to think about how our methods of instruction might > change. During most of this conference, I imagined > that the tools being used would provide an enhancement of a > textbook approach, so that a drawing in a book could be > amplified to better detail until the concept is clear. I am sure that textbook publishers will soon offer passwords to students, for access to web-sites if the professor adopts their textbook. These web sites will undoubtedly have animations, sounds of various types, 3-D appearing diagrams and models, and supplemental material of numerous kinds. They will be professional-looking graphics as are the transparencies the professor can get now. > I always tell my organic students that they need to study with > a pencil in their hands, you must reproduce the chemistry >to fully understand it. I think that is good advice, and add that the student also needs an instructor able to prepare many of his or her own instructional materials. These include graphics of varying degrees of sophistication, worksheets, quizzes, and supplemental materials available on paper now. Computers now allow additional resources and advantages as have been well described in the Papers of this Conference and yet other resources can be imagined. To make this work, however, the web-site preparation tools must be usable by individual instructors. If the web becomes just another method for textbook publishers to distribute their wares, most of its value will be lost, IMO. The web should function like a cable television system, with as many channels as their are chemistry instructors, and not just a few networks dominated by the corporations who publish textbooks. The methods and programming tools that are most useful are ones that individuals, with limited time, can use to deliver chemistry, exactly as they want to teach it to their students. > Is there any potential for chemistry becoming a spectator sport > because of the differences in display technology? Yes, a spectator sport in many senses of the term. And that would be a great loss to chemistry students everywhere. ******************************************************* Gerald Morine, Chemistry Dept., Bemidji State University, Bemidji, Minnesota 56601-2699 USA gmchem@vax1.bemidji.msus.edu http://bsuweb.bemidji.msus.edu/~chemdept/home.html ****************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 13:25:37 +0000 From: "Loretta L. Jones" Subject: Re: What is our objective? Rich Taylor wrote: > I always tell my organic students that they need to study with a pencil > in their hands, you must reproduce the chemistry to fully understand it. > Is there any potential for chemistry becoming a spectator sport because of > the differences in display technology? Suppose students studied with molecular modeling tools and computer-databases in their hands? That would be no less active, but it would certainly be different from studying with a pencil, although it is not yet clear what those differences are. There is a danger that any representation or information given to a student, whether electronic or paper, may replace actual thought by inspiring memorization. The most effective instructional materials and environments may be those that require students to actively process the information, make predictions, and check conclusions. Technology provides an avenue to accomplish that, if we put the computers in students' hands. Loretta L. Jones Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry University of Northern Colorado Greeley, CO 80639 lljones@bentley.univnorthco.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 11:58:28 -0500 From: mudlagiri B Goli Subject: What is our objective I am closely following the discussion on visualization, molecular modelling for a while. I hope you do not mind me adding few words of my own. Sometime I agree that too much of computer may slow down the thinking process( Example: Calculators have spoiled the present generation of kids!!!). But there are more pros than cons that I see in using computers and hands on models or even videos etc. What I believe in is, we are trying to learn( or are trying to teach!!) by letting students use all their five senses(!!). Touch and visualization play an important role in learning process. It is my belief that, if you touch or see something that info. is carved into the memory better than listening. If one do this along with lot of home work I can bet that that student is going to remember it for sometme I have practised it on my, organic chemistry students .They always think chemistry is difficult. But gradually, I use my weapons. . That is the time the lively models and computers do help a lot. Let me stop here. Bye. Goli ****************************************************** *** EMBY GOLI (goli@cypress.mcsr.olemiss.edu) *** *** Associate Professor of Chemistry *** *** Mississippi Valley State University, MS 38941 *** *** (601)254-3644 *** ******************************************************** ------------------------------�������������������������������