« Endosymbiotic by nature | Main | Come together »

The right chemistry

On the train home last night I was directed to an article in The Guardian about the state of chemistry and physics education in the UK. (It's a shame that the picture accompanying the online version is nowhere near as amusing as the one in the actual newspaper - it was your stereotypical wild-hair crazy-professor type, complete with labcoat, standing in front of a blackboard covered with chemical structures and even the mechanism of ester hydrolysis... base-catalysed just in case you were wondering).

One of my favourite passages is the following:

Add to the old stereotypes new ones about shortening attention spans and a rise in the need for instant gratification and it starts to look as if, while sticking a splint in a bunsen burner or watching magnesium combust might have swung things in the old days, these days it just won't do.

I wonder if I'd had an XBOX whether I would have been so excited about a bit of sodium whizzing around in a beaker of water; all those flame tests with different colours probably wouldn't have been all that captivating either...

If you have a few minutes to spare, go and have a read and ponder on who should be the Jamie Oliver (link included for the last few people on Earth who don't know who this is) of chemistry?!

Stuart


Stuart Cantrill (Associate Editor, Nature Nanotechnology)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://blogs.nature.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1027

Comments

A local cop with a GED starts at $(US)60K/annum, incredible benefits, and a goverment pension independent of Social Security after only 20 years. A Homeland Severity jackbooted enforcer at LAX, warrantlessly searching and seizing, can get $120K/annum with overtime. An NIH post-doc... might make $35K/annum and pay off his student loans, someday. Which one was stupid?

We have purhased at terrible price a future nobody wanted. Now it is arrived. How can anybody be dissatisfied with diversity?

Post a comment

Comments will be reviewed by the editors before being published. You can be as critical or controversial as you like, but please don't get personal or offensive. We strongly encourage you to use your real, full name. Email addresses are required: this is in case we need to discuss your comment with you privately, or notify you in case we decide not publish your comment. Email addresses will not be made public on the blog.


Please enter the numbers you see below - this helps us to cut down on spam. If you are having trouble with this system, you can instead e-mail a comment to 'thescepticalchymist at boston dot nature dot com '.

Subscribe

Subscribe to this blog's feeds:

[What is this?]

Recent Comments

Out of 1046 total comments,
the most recent were:
Powered by
Movable Type 3.2