I'm Writing a Textbook

[Jon the Geek]

I'm writing a college-freshman-level, majors general chemistry textbook. I can't go into a lot of detail right now (for contractual reasons), but so far I haven't run into anything that I've wanted to do that have spooked my editor or publisher at all.

I want to work skepticism and critical thinking into the book as much as possible, and I'd like suggestions. Help me shape some future scientists into better skeptics!

Some things I'm already doing:
* All section titles are questions, such as "What affects the pressure of a gas?" Throughout the section, the students are presented with data and guided through the answer to the question, rather than simply presented with "Boyle found that volume affects the pressure, P1V1 = P2V2. Charles and Gay-Lussac found that temperature affects the pressure, P1/T1 = P2/T2, etc." My goal is to take the mystery out of chemistry as much as possible; Boyle didn't divine Boyle's law, he simply summarized the data that he found in his experiments.
* Each chapter ends with a "How sure are we about ___?" section, such as "How sure are we about the gas laws and kinetic molecular theory?" (in which I'll introduce real gases, leading into the chapter on real gases and liquids). I want to stress that science may be a quest for truth, but we can never be certain that we've gotten to "the answer."
* In the first chapter, rather than simply throwing out the fundamentals such as SI units and precision vs accuracy, I am presenting a puzzle to be solved, and guiding the student using the scientific method, measurements, etc to solve the puzzle. This chapter ends with "How sure can we be?", rather than the usual "How sure are we...?", since I'm not presenting any specific laws or theories.

Your thoughts and suggestions would be greatly appreciated!

 

[Zbu]

Don't be too skeptical or otherwise people will try to reason why they have to buy a second edition a year later.

 

[Katachresis]

::bump up::

I always found thought experiments useful. "Imagine if the bond was very weak, what would happen?"

 

[KingMerv00]

I'm glad you are doing this. I majored in chem but was basically forced to memorize rather than understand. Kudos.

I recommend throwing in somehow that chemical reactions are not random. Maybe then we will stop hearing about the "tornado through a junkyard" analogy.

 

[Jon the Geek]

::bump up::

Thanks The more suggestions I get, the better!

I always found thought experiments useful. "Imagine if the bond was very weak, what would happen?"

Agreed. I'm also trying to work in a lot of analogies and metaphors, not only because those tend to make things easier to understand, but because there's considerable evidence that that's all learning really is--making metaphors.

I'm glad you are doing this. I majored in chem but was basically forced to memorize rather than understand. Kudos.

Thanks. I've very happy to have this opportunity. If it continues to go as well as it has been going, we'll be doing a whole line of these, at least in the chemistry and physics disciplines.

I recommend throwing in somehow that chemical reactions are not random. Maybe then we will stop hearing about the "tornado through a junkyard" analogy.

That will definitely be there. Chapter 2 (after fundamentals/the scientific method) is "Matter and Energy". From there on, the focus is essentially that the thing that's easiest always happens, all that changes is what's easiest under the given conditions.

Please continue the suggestions!

 

[Zbu]

Well, since I feel bad about 'edition' post that I made solely in jest, I do have a recommendation: please, at all times, try to tell people the real definition of theory. It seems minor, but it's frustating when I hear people misuse it to justify their woo.

 

[Jon the Geek]

Well, since I feel bad about 'edition' post that I made solely in jest, I do have a recommendation: please, at all times, try to tell people the real definition of theory. It seems minor, but it's frustating when I hear people misuse it to justify their woo.

VERY much agreed. I forgot to mention that bit. One of the things I'll stress in the "Scientific Method" chapter is that a law isn't a big deal, it's just a summary of observations... but a theory is the big enchilada, reached at the culmination of the scientific method (not that science doesn't continue after a theory is reached, of course).

 

[geni]

I'm writing a college-freshman-level, majors general chemistry textbook. I can't go into a lot of detail right now (for contractual reasons), but so far I haven't run into anything that I've wanted to do that have spooked my editor or publisher at all.

I want to work skepticism and critical thinking into the book as much as possible, and I'd like suggestions. Help me shape some future scientists into better skeptics!

Tell them what organic papers claim as yields. The rate at which they become sceptical of such claims will be impressive.

Some things I'm already doing:
* All section titles are questions, such as "What affects the pressure of a gas?" Throughout the section, the students are presented with data and guided through the answer to the question, rather than simply presented with "Boyle found that volume affects the pressure, P1V1 = P2V2. Charles and Gay-Lussac found that temperature affects the pressure, P1/T1 = P2/T2, etc." My goal is to take the mystery out of chemistry as much as possible; Boyle didn't divine Boyle's law, he simply summarized the data that he found in his experiments.

Looks like I will be sticking to Atkins then. When I'm looking in a physis chem text book I want answers and I want them in a way I understand. If I want to know where the data comes from I'll look it up in the journals.

* Each chapter ends with a "How sure are we about ___?" section, such as "How sure are we about the gas laws and kinetic molecular theory?" (in which I'll introduce real gases, leading into the chapter on real gases and liquids). I want to stress that science may be a quest for truth, but we can never be certain that we've gotten to "the answer."

I'm pretty sure that is what the generaly text is for (ok so for the most part this is what lectures are for). If I have to wait until the end of the chapter for you to tell me that PV=nRT only applies to ideal gasses I'm going to be a little anoyed.

* In the first chapter, rather than simply throwing out the fundamentals such as SI units and precision vs accuracy, I am presenting a puzzle to be solved, and guiding the student using the scientific method, measurements, etc to solve the puzzle. This chapter ends with "How sure can we be?", rather than the usual "How sure are we...?", since I'm not presenting any specific laws or theories.

So when I need to know that J=kg·m²·s⁻² (generaly when I end up dealing with equations involveing the ideal gas constant) I'm going to have to solve a puzzle?

 

[Diamond]

"What affects the pressure of a gas?"

A: Baked beans, spanish onions, curry powder and diet Dr Pepper. Or is that just me?

 

[Jekyll]

Throughout the section, the students are presented with data and guided through the answer to the question, rather than simply presented with "Boyle found that volume affects the pressure, P1V1 = P2V2. Charles and Gay-Lussac found that temperature affects the pressure, P1/T1 = P2/T2, etc." My goal is to take the mystery out of chemistry as much as possible; Boyle didn't divine Boyle's law, he simply summarized the data that he found in his experiments.

I understand what you're going for here, but you have to be careful that you don't take the fun out of science and reduce it to some kind of data mining exercise.
Counter examples to your idea are;
Relitivity (both kinds)
Maxwell's equations
The structure of DNA
The structure of Benzene ~possibly allegorical but then there is this "My mental eye..could now distinguish larger structures of manifold conformations; long rows, sometimes more closely fitted together; all twisting and turning in snake-like motion. But look! What was that? One of the snakes had seized hold of its own tail..." taken from Kekulé's writings http://www.ch.ic.ac.uk/rzepa/mim/environmental/html/benzene_text.htm

One of the key attributes of a good scientist is insight, and you do need a good hunch to back when you decide which variables are worth studying and how.

You can't just do experiments and see what happens; the world is to big and interesting a place for that.

 

[Jon the Geek]

I understand what you're going for here, but you have to be careful that you don't take the fun out of science and reduce it to some kind of data mining exercise.

Would it help to assuage your fears if I pointed out that the chapter has a question or series of questions that the students are trying to solve? This is another one of those things that will be much easier to describe in the coming months, once the chapter has been "released into the wild" for outside review, because right now I'm contrectually forbidden from "letting the cat out of the bag," so to speak

In addition, things like Kekule will definitely require different treatment then things like Boyle's law. I can't expect students to come up with every insight a scientist has made, but things that are simply summaries of data can be just as easily "discovered" by the student.

BTW, it isn't like "Boyle's law," as in the labeled equations (P1V1=P2V2 and P = k/V), never appears in the text. The data to get there is simply presented first. Students who don't want to remember it and just want to use the printed textbook as a reference are free to skip through looking for the offset equations. I don't think they'll learn much if they do so, but I don't force them to figure it out if they just want to look it up.

 

[Jekyll]

Would it help to assuage your fears if I pointed out that the chapter has a question or series of questions that the students are trying to solve? This is another one of those things that will be much easier to describe in the coming months, once the chapter has been "released into the wild" for outside review, because right now I'm contrectually forbidden from "letting the cat out of the bag," so to speak

I'll tell you what, I'll hold off issuing a fatwa until you release the sample chapter .

Don't forget to generate your data by actually doing the experiments, not just adding noise to the predictions, these things get noticed.

Honestly, I think the smart thing about Boyles law is that he thought to look for it, not that he spotted the relationship once he looked. I'm curious as to how your going to show this to your students/readers.

Good luck.

 

[athon]

Excellent work, Jon. I must admit, this isn't something I've given a lot of thought to before (structuring text books), mostly because I've been forced to do without them for much of my teaching career.

That said, your ideas are excellent. Phrasing through question motivates students to do the same, something which is invaluable. I can give a few tips on what appeals to teachers, though.

* Clear chapter sections that are complete. Both, questions that are simple and evident in the text, and advanced questions that require the student 'abstract' the concrete information they have ('novel' situations unexplored in the text).

* Summaries in dot form that detail what the chapter's basic points were.

* Text boxes or separate pages that give practical applications of the chemistry at work (preferably that will work in a class setting, and require basic preparation).

* Diagrams that are easy to copy straight from the text book.

I'd also recommend supplementary worksheets that can accompany the text, or a 'teacher's guide' that can go with it. Anything that will make it easier for an educator to prepare a lesson with the text in mind is useful.

That's my input as a teacher.

On a more creative front, have you considered a bit of a 'what if?' section to each chapter which addresses either early misconceptions in science (e.g., the whole 'phlogiston' theory), or 'what if Scientist X did not take Y into account'? Things that make students pay attention to the process and methodology. Encouraging students to take note of variables and critical analysis is difficult to do, but your text would be a perfect place for it.

I hope this helps a little.

Athon