Hitting a nerve

The article "Congress Tackles Education Issues" has touched a nerve in my life (C&EN, June 12, page 32).

I have always maintained that I became a better chemistry teacher as I took chemistry classes toward a master's degree at Villanova University's summer chemistry program for high school teachers. It was a great, rigorous, and challenging program. The teachers enrolled came in contact with outstanding instructors who took the time to help high school teachers understand graduate chemistry courses and ultimately do a better job of teaching high school chemistry. I followed that with a Ph.D. program from Florida State University.

Today we see few candidates who want to teach high school chemistry after completing a B.S. or M.S. degree in chemistry. There just is not enough money for all the effort and aggravation that comes with high school chemistry teaching.

What, then, is the background of those going into high school chemistry teaching? Some are physical education or health majors who have taken one or two courses in chemistry and passed the certification test. How they manage to become certified is beyond my comprehension. In talking with colleagues, I find some of these "certified" teachers have no idea what a molar solution is or how it is prepared.

Putting more money in the preparation of chemistry teachers or science teachers could be an approach that would work if science teachers' salaries were competitive with industry's. The chemistry preparation of these teachers certainly needs to be rigorous. The instructors chosen need to realize the importance of this task assigned to them. They should not be forced to teach those courses, but should teach because they believe they have a real mission to accomplish.

A second part of the problem that never seems to be addressed is the student population that well-qualified and enthusiastic teachers have to face. Many students who take chemistry are sophomores whose parents believe that they have spawned young Einsteins and who do not have time to study in addition to all the sports activities in which they participate.

A third consideration is that we easily forget how much money is being spent on special education. How much money is being spent on youngsters with real talent? Gifted students are assigned to classes in which the subject matter has to be watered down to accommodate students from the entire spectrum of ability.

This is egalitarianism; it is not the way to promote and encourage youngsters to pursue a career in chemistry. An equal amount of money spent on gifted students would really help give us a competitive edge with students from other countries, who are told in which classes they will be placed, unlike here, where parents tell the school in which classes they want their budding Einsteins assigned.

I realize everyone needs some exposure to some chemistry, but a handful need to be nurtured by chemistry teachers who will prepare these students with the proper math and chemistry skills to give them a competitive edge with foreign science students.

J. Guy Morin
Monroe, N.Y.