For more than 40 years, I have listened to friends and colleagues bemoan the state-of-the-art in the content of the general chemistry course. (And, at times, I will admit to having done so myself.) Early in my career, there was the clarion call for a return of descriptive chemistry to a course that was presumed to focus too much on the uncomprehending learning of chemical theories and principles. A call, by the way, that was often accompanied by references to a famous paper by one of my senior colleagues that was cited by people who didn't seem to realize that it had called for a return to descriptive chemistry in the senior inorganic chemistry course, not general chemistry [see J. Chem. Educ., 1970, 47(4), 271]. And, it might be noted, a call that apparently was not heeded by authors of general chemistry textbooks.More recent years have witnessed complaints about the absence of a conceptual understanding among students who have supposedly focused on what has been called �algorithmic� problem solving. Perhaps it is time to reflect on whether we should have been referring to algebraic problem solving inasmuch as �problem solving,� by definition, is not algorithmic. And to perhaps ask whether there is, in fact, a more important skill that could possibly be fostered in general chemistry than transferrable problem-solving skills; skills that have historically been at the heart of the practice of chemistry and have been valued by both instructors of courses for which chemistry has been a prerequisite and by employers who hire the graduates of STEM education programs.

Is it time for the pendulum to swing once again? Problem solving in General Chemistry

248th National Meeting (2014)

The official archive and repository for all ACS Meetings & Expositions abstracts and select posters or presentations.