Dartmouth's Intellectual Life
The Department of Chemistry
In this new scientific age the student of human affairs isquite likely to assign to chemistry the place that BlackMagic held in the Middle Ages. The scientific chemist ofthese days is everywhere reputed a marvel, a man who canchange the whole practice of medicine, a man who cancompute not only the nature of materials in distant starsbut can even alter human behavior by chemical treatment ofglands. The chemist is the man {by popular repute) whocontrols the destinies of the zvorld through his ability tomanufacture war stuff, poison gases, liquid fire, germbombs and other devilish things; he can make new food forus when our old supply is gone, he can invent new combustibles, and he can invent new oils for locomotion.These are a few things that the chemist is reputed to do.Professor Scarlett in presenting the first article of a scientific nature in this series defines the subject and process asit is taught to undergraduates.
ONE of the problems of a scientific department in a liberal college is to provide a general first course which will satisfy the demands of the earnest seeker after a broad education, and yet will provide the fundamental background necessary for those who wish to follow the science, or use it in professional fields. The experiment of separating the two types of students has been tried (in other institutions); but it is highly dangerous. How does the freshman know that he wishes to take chemistry as a cultural subject only; or that he may not become interested in life work which requires a thorough grounding in this subject? A year of cultural or pandemic chemistry is not a substitute for the regular course, and must be thrown away if the student decides to take up the study further. Most attempts to popularize chemistry by eliminating theory and trying to teach only the wonderful results have resulted in dismal failures. The pandemic course, if it ever comes, will probably deal only with simple facts already familiar to the student; and the time will be spent in considering the explanation of each fact; the teacher being the main authority for the tried physical and chemical theories.
In the meantime, our general courses have been accomplishing their dual purpose surprisingly well. We try not to stress the small details of the subject, but to develop the most important theories, emphasizing the facts and laws on which they are based. Above all, we try to give a first hand idea of the scientific method; and we are quite satisfied if our one-year cultural student gains some knowledge of the relation between fact and theory, even if for no better reason than that he may more thoroughly enjoy such modern "best-sellers" as The Hunger Fighters by Paul de Gruif.
Modern teaching of chemistry has been criticized as being too much interested in theory; and has been compared unfavorably with the courses in the gay nineties when more interest was shown in unchangeable facts. The oldtime instructor would sit at his desk behind a row of unlabelled bottles filled with chemicals of all colors. Suddenly he would pick up a bottle of powdered charcoal. Then would come a typical question, "What is the color of zinc sulphate?" "Black," would answer the bright boy in the 'O2 sweater. "Black as the driven snow," would be the triumphant reply of the teacher; and one more important fact was pigeon-holed in the brain of the youth, along with historical dates, football signals, at cetera. But brains are not constructed of innumerable pigeon holes. They seem to be built more like cobwebs and to require that facts, to be retained, must be shown to have some correlation with other facts. Today, we are still interested in the whiteness of zinc sulphate; but we try also to explain it. We are interested in trying to find out why this zinc sulphate in water solution is colorless, while a very similar substance, copper sulphate, forms a blue solution. We do not try to obtain the complete explanation; but we do try to correlate this fact with other facts and ideas of chemistry and physics; and we soon arrive at very usecultural purposes, cannot help but profit by an understanding of this proper application of the scientific method.
The chemistry courses of the last century may not have respected fancy theories, but they one and all tried to teach the most difficult theory and concept that can be found in any elementary college subject—the Dalton atomic theory and atomic weights. There is nothing theoretical about atomic weights as weights; but the reasoning behind them is enough to floor the average undergraduate student. Bridgman, in TheLogic of Modern Physics, shows that the atom is a "construct," that is, a mechanism designed to explain the behavior of matter. We can only infer the existence of atoms and may never directly observe them. But we have gone farther and have postulated protons and electrons, themselves "constructs" and the building blocks of which atoms are composed. In past years the chemist has collected a tremendous amount of data without a rational underlying theory. The physicist has constructed an intricate theory for the arrangement of protons and electrons in atoms, drawing his facts largely from spectroscopic data. Now, the facts of the chemist and this theory of the physicist are drawing together; and the student finds it quite easy to construct pictures of atoms that will satisfy the known facts of each of these two sciences; and the whiteness of zinc sulphate fits in with the rest, and is no longer a lonely, isolated fact of no earthly importance. Future chemical education will include the correlation of chemical properties with all sorts of physical constants, such, for example, as atomic radius, a directly measurable quantity which may or may not be the actual radius of our atom. We think the study of chemistry and physics is more interesting now than in the old days, and more profitable to the student who wants to find out what it is all about, but who does not intend to make science his life work.
_ Nearly forty percent of our beginners continue into higher chemistry courses, some because they think advanced work will help in their chosen fields, others to secure the strict medical school prerequisites, and an increasing number who wish to major in chemistry. After the first year there are regular analytical and organic courses, and the student reaches senior year with some skill in laboratory technic, a general idea of the scope of inorganic and organic chemistry, and plenty of experience and knowledge in analytical methods. This is the full training for all but those who major in chemistry. The senior curriculum for majors requires three courses. First, a course in physical chemistry, the study of all the laws which govern chemical phenomenon, mathematical treatment being used where possible. We try to make it approach an exact science, hence the misleading name—physical chemistry. Second, the time of one course is devoted to a review of the whole field, especially descriptive inorganic and organic chemistry, and designed to prepare the student for our new comprehensive examination. Third, the only real advanced course is selected either from organic or analytical chemistry.
At the end of their senior year, our men are well grounded in the fundamentals, and are prepared to do graduate work, while some actually succeed in entering chemical industry directly, going eventually to the plant or business side. Graduate training is necessary for research positions. The usual quota take up teaching in secondary schools without further chemical training. We have no graduate students, strictly speaking, in chemistry. Our young instructors are permitted to take advanced courses and do research work leading to the master's degree. A number of our best students have remained for this post-graduate work; and the results obtained have been highly satisfactory.
