Comments on: Chemical Edutainment and Undergrad Labs

By: j

Sat, 17 Jan 2009 17:19:16 +0000

It’s a good point about NMR. Clearly, as organic chemists, we use NMR frequently. Having a firm grasp on theory and interpretation is a necessary component to completing our tasks (i.e. what good is synthesis if you can’t identify what you’ve made). For whatever it’s worth, I honestly couldn’t tell you where to find a burette in my building.

However (I’m speaking for myself), the concept of mass balance and chemical precision never really hit home until I got heavy into titrations as an undergrad. I use the lessons learned from the numerous titrations I’ve run on a daily basis while I complete my degree. Subjectively, during my undergrad the “necessary” skills weren’t well-covered for the purposes of becoming an organic chemist. Fortunately, many of the things I learned in an analytical setting (i.e. lecture, lab, instrumentation) filled in the gaps. As such, I’d consider myself very well rounded compared to my immediate peers.

By: Zaphod

Zaphod — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:12:16 +0000

@j
Yeah, I’m an organic chemist too and regularly titrated the alkyl lithiums etc, but that’s not my point. Titration is a moderately useful skill for a few applications but not nearly as important as one would think given the time devoted to it in undergrad labs. Think about how many proton nmrs you’ve run compared to titrations, for example.

By: boyie

boyie — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 03:27:54 +0000

All solid state chemists (such as myself), have rudimentary glass blowing training. Considering most of our reactions are run in fused silica or pyrex tubes, it’s a must if you’re going to do anything in our lab. The more senior students can make other glass tubes, so it’s pretty sweet. A very important one as well.

By: Enahs

Enahs — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 02:51:19 +0000

You can go on and on all you want. Most undergraduates studying Chemistry have no care for Chemistry. It is a stepping stone to go to medical school or nursing or pharmacy, etc etc. If they do not care about it and do not want to learn, they are not going to.

If you are a graduate student studying chemistry, you better enjoy chemistry and want to learn chemistry or you are in big trouble.

By: retread

retread — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 23:52:44 +0000

Well it wasn’t like that as an Ivy League Undergrad ‘58 – ‘60, or a grad student ‘60 – ‘62 teaching other Ivy league kids (few of whom were chemistry majors). People back then worked hard, knew their stuff and didn’t complain. The only evaluation TAs got was how well their section did on tests (which we didn’t make up or see before they were given). Judging by the post and the comments evoked, everything presently seems reversed.

See the In the Pipeline blog of 9 Jan ‘09 for a link to the “Four Yorkshiremen sketch”, a Monty Python classic, with 4 relatively young old geezers complaining about how hard they had it, and how easy people have it now.

Out nightmare back then was that we would be replaced by a younger, smarter, better educated group. It doesn’t seem to have happened.

By: Fleaker

Fleaker — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:22:49 +0000

At the larger universities there is usually a dedicated glassblower on campus to serve the physics and chemistry departments. Professors and students alike usually consult the scientific glassblower (especially when it comes to anything made of quartz–a nightmare to work) if they want complex apparatus or need something fixed.

I’m not saying that grad students should know how to make their own vacuum manifold or reflux condenser, but simple things like scoring and breaking glass, making ampoules, and attaching one glass piece to another should be a minimum.

Nowadays, most researchers simply order their glass from Ace, Chemglass, or any other number of suppliers. Unfortunately, many of the reactions I run require specialised glassware that’s not often found in the catalogues. I’ve found it cheaper, and more importantly, quicker to (try) to make my own. If it’s above my modest skill, then I contact the glassblower or order out if he’s backlogged. When something needs to get done and you’re waiting on your glass supply company to figure out what it is that’s wanted and how to make it and how much to charge for it, you’re left waiting in the queue. It’s a real pity that the art is disappearing…

By: psi*psi

psi*psi — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 03:34:33 +0000

You and me both! Actually, we got to do a tiny bit of glassblowing as part of our inorg lab…it was super fun!

By: mitch

mitch — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 17:33:02 +0000

Lisa Jarvis has more on chemical edutainment:
http://cenblog.org/2009/01/13/should-chemistry-go-interactive/

By: j

Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:51:44 +0000

We titrate in our lab on a daily basis (granted, we’re organic).

By: Zaphod

Zaphod — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 06:58:28 +0000

I agree with much of what you say except the titrations bit. In my view this is a totally outdated technique that is only useful in some narrow specialized applicarions. Computer labs don’t teach dead languages (by and large) so why should we? For the record I did hundreds of titrations in undergrad, including titration competitions (!) but in my subsequent 20 year career as a chemist I doubt I would have done more than a handful. We have limited lab time with undergrads so let’s teach them the most relevant techniques.