Chemical Forums
Specialty Chemistry Forums => Chemical Education and Careers => Topic started by: Woopy on January 21, 2013, 12:38:25 AM
-
Hello,
I am an organic chemistry student, and I have some concerns over the way Organic chemistry is taught relative to other science classes. I come from a physical science background mostly, and ochem is presented in a very different manner from anything I've ever seen before, no math and very strange. I find my textbook (gorzynski-smith) lends itself to a memorization type of learning, because it doesn't give a lot of motivation for why anything is the way it is, but rather a laundry list of facts, such as ''sn1 favors this, sn2 that..etc). Also the class contains so much stuff that it becomes cumbersome to do anything but memorize, because for a lot of mechanisms all these weird assumptions are made and every mechanism has its own caveat.
I am of the opinion that there must be a better way to present this material, I've been told by my professor to take everything on a case by case basis. I don't know how you can take everything on a case by case basis, there must be some sort of generalizations, the universe seems to be orderly and generalizable in all other regards. Maybe I'm just doing it wrong, but I think o-chem sucks and needs a revamp.
-
I am of the opinion that there must be a better way to present this material
You are not the first one to think this way. Actually each OrgChem newcomer that came from more rigorous branches (like PhysChem) thinks this way. Sn1 and Sn2 that you listed ARE generalizations, as they cover wast number of reactions. Unfortunately, organic chemistry is way too complex for a small number of easy to state rules.
Could be others will not agree with me.
-
Nothing in college gave me more trouble than organic chemistry, and it's for the exact reasons you posted. I know several people that did great in our Chem E classes but horribly in organic, and I also know several people that were the exact opposite. Organic is a very different learning situation and I'm not exactly sure there really is any other way to present it. Just know that you are not alone in your feelings, not by a long shot.
-
Get yourself a good textbook, for example, Advanced Organic Chemistry by Jerry March and read it cover to cover.
-
Get yourself a good textbook, for example, Advanced Organic Chemistry by Jerry March and read it cover to cover.
Isn't this a graduate level textbook? I've only done my first semester of organic chemistry (the introductory series)
-
This was the recommended textbook for me along with Morrison and Boyd amongst others as an undergraduate.
-
What's your major?
-
Mine?
-
I am doing chemical engineering
-
I am doing chemical engineering
Ha! That was my guess too. ;D But, yes, I sympathize without having any good answers for you. I'll say that perhaps it needs a lot more reading and effort (than other subjects) before the really big picture emerges in OChem. So, keep trying and maybe enlightenment will follow.
And yes, the mathematical rigor is lesser than other subjects you are used to; but you just have to master a different style of thinking.
there must be some sort of generalizations, the universe seems to be orderly and generalizable in all other regards.
That's mostly because you've been studying idealized simple systems so far (I assume?). Point masses, friction-less tables, round balls, symmetric things, analytical solutions etc. Just wait till you see the number of messy, complex correlations used by Chemical Engineers to predict all sort of real world phenomenon.
The laws of physics are elegant and genealizable but scaling up to real world objects often gets messy. Be warned! :)
-
I am of the opinion that there must be a better way to present this material, I've been told by my professor to take everything on a case by case basis. I don't know how you can take everything on a case by case basis, there must be some sort of generalizations, the universe seems to be orderly and generalizable in all other regards.
I don't know if I really agree with a case by case basis. If someone understands how the structures of molecules effect reactions then there are a lot of reactions one can make pretty good predictions of the the outcome of the reaction.
It makes me sad to see that you say the class seems to push you towards memorizing things. There is surly things to be memorize (as there is in almost every class), but there is (to me at least) logic to organic chemistry, and it seems like it is not being communicated to you. I wish I knew what to say to help you see it...The only thing that i can really come up with off the top of my head is to really try and understand the structures (including different bonding theories) and the different functional groups and understand the electrophile and nucleophile relationship well.
-
Just wait till you see the number of messy, complex correlations used by Chemical Engineers to predict all sort of real world phenomenon.
One of my co-workers is in the early stages of going back to school for a bachelors in Chem E. Just for a laugh I showed him the full long-form Navier-Stokes equation. I wish I would've had a camera to capture his expression.
-
Organic chemistry students must use different parts of their brain from physical chemistry students. One has to learn how to picture molecules in three dimensions and to propose multistep synthetic schemes (in other words, how to build up complex molecules from simple ones. I would suggest you approach the subject with less thought toward memorization and more thought toward why and how things work. Find a topic, such as SN1 versus SN2 and read different textbooks on it. Ask yourself questions such as how does one go about disproving a mechanism.
-
To be honest I found Org chem one of the easier parts of my undergrad Biochem course (Morrison & Boyd was the textbook of choice), but that may be more due to the way it was taught.
My university used the Keller Plan system, where you are given a shortish reading list to complete within 1 week. After the week is up you sit a test on the material and if you get the appropriate mark you are provided with a new list, if not you are asked to re-read and resit the following week. The system was designed to allow for a few retests and still complete the full course. It was by no means easy (80% was a pass) but I found it an effective learning tool.
It was also used in Biochem to teach us the metabolic pathways.
-
To be honest I found Org chem one of the easier parts of my undergrad Biochem course (Morrison & Boyd was the textbook of choice), but that may be more due to the way it was taught.
My university used the Keller Plan system, where you are given a shortish reading list to complete within 1 week. After the week is up you sit a test on the material and if you get the appropriate mark you are provided with a new list, if not you are asked to re-read and resit the following week. The system was designed to allow for a few retests and still complete the full course. It was by no means easy (80% was a pass) but I found it an effective learning tool.
It was also used in Biochem to teach us the metabolic pathways.
As an aside, if he's stumped and frustrated by Org. Chem. I'd think BioChem would be worse.
-
I wouldn't say stumped (I got an A in O-chem I barely), but I am not confident at this stuff whatsoever. Organic Chemistry is like the vegetables on my plate that I am forced to eat before getting dessert (chem engineering classes)
-
It was exactly the same for me but the other way round. I had to endure fuel science before I got to O-Chem.
There is no way round it you will just have to grit your teeth and get through it.
-
I thought much of organic chemistry was very intuitive when viewed from the perspective that there are nucleophiles and electrophiles and they attract. That was my generalization. It's certainly not a complete point of view (particularly for pericyclics) but it did me well through the courses I took involving organic. And resonance, understand resonance.
I too am on the physical side of things and you'll see as you go on the universe is not orderly and tidey. Only the simplest systems (virtually noninteracting) can be handled exactly or even near exactly.
-
To be honest I found Org chem one of the easier parts of my undergrad Biochem course (Morrison & Boyd was the textbook of choice), but that may be more due to the way it was taught.
My university used the Keller Plan system, where you are given a shortish reading list to complete within 1 week. After the week is up you sit a test on the material and if you get the appropriate mark you are provided with a new list, if not you are asked to re-read and resit the following week. The system was designed to allow for a few retests and still complete the full course. It was by no means easy (80% was a pass) but I found it an effective learning tool.
It was also used in Biochem to teach us the metabolic pathways.
As an aside, if he's stumped and frustrated by Org. Chem. I'd think BioChem would be worse.
My point was that, possibly, breaking the subject down to "bite sized" chunks with frequent review could improve learning and understanding. It worked for me at the time in both Org chem and Biochem.