From Source to Sink: Mechanistic Reasoning Using the Electron-Pushing Formalism
Since the introduction of Morrison and Boyd’s textbook in organic chemistry over 50 years ago, reaction mechanisms and mechanistic reasoning using the electron-pushing formalism (EPF) have become a mainstay of organic chemistry courses. In recent years there have even been several papers in this Jou...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of chemical education 2013-10, Vol.90 (10), p.1282-1289 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1289 |
---|---|
container_issue | 10 |
container_start_page | 1282 |
container_title | Journal of chemical education |
container_volume | 90 |
creator | Bhattacharyya, Gautam |
description | Since the introduction of Morrison and Boyd’s textbook in organic chemistry over 50 years ago, reaction mechanisms and mechanistic reasoning using the electron-pushing formalism (EPF) have become a mainstay of organic chemistry courses. In recent years there have even been several papers in this Journal and others detailing research on how students attend to various aspects of this formalism. However, there are no explicit articulations of a definition or framework in the chemical or science education research literature on mechanistic reasoning using EPF. Although practicing chemists intuitively know what constitutes mechanistic reasoning, this paper presents results of a nationwide study of organic chemistry faculty regarding their understanding and use of this technique. Although a consensus definition did not emerge from this research, there were several common features to them. These features suggest an activity that has a back-of-the-envelope quality meant to generate possible pathways based on established patterns of reactivity. Consistent with this view, the experts’ focus for skills required to develop dexterity in this type of mechanistic reasoning was on applied ones rather than those that are more theoretical in nature. Finally, the principal uses of mechanistic reasoning using EPF, according to the respondents, are to explain and predict outcomes of chemical processes. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1021/ed300765k |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1442805156</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1028483</ericid><sourcerecordid>3102389951</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a309t-e81c2b01e7c6c157b555decc6a6aab6ac5548ce2c8e31713cca0cf020d4ae00b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNplkE9Lw0AQxRdRsFYPfgBhQTx4iM5ms8nGm5TWP1Qq1p7DZjq12zZZ3U0PfntTIkXwMgPzfrzHPMbOBdwIiMUtzSVAlqr1AeuJXOpIyFgfsh60YpQrnRyzkxBWACJWue6xyci7ik_d1iPxxvGprdd3_IVwaWobGov8jUxwta0_-CzsZrMkPtwQNt7V0es2LHfHkfOV2dhQnbKjhdkEOvvdfTYbDd8Hj9F48vA0uB9HRkLeRKQFxiUIyjBFobJSKTUnxNSkxpSpQaUSjRSjJikyIREN4AJimCeGAErZZ5ed76d3X1sKTbFqf6jbyEIkSaxBCZW21HVHoXcheFoUn95Wxn8XAopdX8W-r5a96FjyFvfc8LnFdKJlq191usHwJ-yfzw9hZXKm</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1442805156</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>From Source to Sink: Mechanistic Reasoning Using the Electron-Pushing Formalism</title><source>ACS Publications</source><creator>Bhattacharyya, Gautam</creator><creatorcontrib>Bhattacharyya, Gautam</creatorcontrib><description>Since the introduction of Morrison and Boyd’s textbook in organic chemistry over 50 years ago, reaction mechanisms and mechanistic reasoning using the electron-pushing formalism (EPF) have become a mainstay of organic chemistry courses. In recent years there have even been several papers in this Journal and others detailing research on how students attend to various aspects of this formalism. However, there are no explicit articulations of a definition or framework in the chemical or science education research literature on mechanistic reasoning using EPF. Although practicing chemists intuitively know what constitutes mechanistic reasoning, this paper presents results of a nationwide study of organic chemistry faculty regarding their understanding and use of this technique. Although a consensus definition did not emerge from this research, there were several common features to them. These features suggest an activity that has a back-of-the-envelope quality meant to generate possible pathways based on established patterns of reactivity. Consistent with this view, the experts’ focus for skills required to develop dexterity in this type of mechanistic reasoning was on applied ones rather than those that are more theoretical in nature. Finally, the principal uses of mechanistic reasoning using EPF, according to the respondents, are to explain and predict outcomes of chemical processes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-9584</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1938-1328</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1021/ed300765k</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JCEDA8</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Easton: American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc</publisher><subject>Articulation ; Chemical Education Research ; Chemical reactions ; Chemistry ; Chemists ; Cognition & reasoning ; College Faculty ; College Science ; Curricula ; Definitions ; Formalism ; Logical Thinking ; Organic Chemistry ; Pushing ; Reaction mechanisms ; Reasoning ; Respondents ; Science education ; Science Instruction ; Skill development ; Skills ; Textbooks</subject><ispartof>Journal of chemical education, 2013-10, Vol.90 (10), p.1282-1289</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2013 American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright American Chemical Society Oct 8, 2013</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a309t-e81c2b01e7c6c157b555decc6a6aab6ac5548ce2c8e31713cca0cf020d4ae00b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a309t-e81c2b01e7c6c157b555decc6a6aab6ac5548ce2c8e31713cca0cf020d4ae00b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/ed300765k$$EPDF$$P50$$Gacs$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/ed300765k$$EHTML$$P50$$Gacs$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,2752,27053,27901,27902,56713,56763</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1028483$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bhattacharyya, Gautam</creatorcontrib><title>From Source to Sink: Mechanistic Reasoning Using the Electron-Pushing Formalism</title><title>Journal of chemical education</title><addtitle>J. Chem. Educ</addtitle><description>Since the introduction of Morrison and Boyd’s textbook in organic chemistry over 50 years ago, reaction mechanisms and mechanistic reasoning using the electron-pushing formalism (EPF) have become a mainstay of organic chemistry courses. In recent years there have even been several papers in this Journal and others detailing research on how students attend to various aspects of this formalism. However, there are no explicit articulations of a definition or framework in the chemical or science education research literature on mechanistic reasoning using EPF. Although practicing chemists intuitively know what constitutes mechanistic reasoning, this paper presents results of a nationwide study of organic chemistry faculty regarding their understanding and use of this technique. Although a consensus definition did not emerge from this research, there were several common features to them. These features suggest an activity that has a back-of-the-envelope quality meant to generate possible pathways based on established patterns of reactivity. Consistent with this view, the experts’ focus for skills required to develop dexterity in this type of mechanistic reasoning was on applied ones rather than those that are more theoretical in nature. Finally, the principal uses of mechanistic reasoning using EPF, according to the respondents, are to explain and predict outcomes of chemical processes.</description><subject>Articulation</subject><subject>Chemical Education Research</subject><subject>Chemical reactions</subject><subject>Chemistry</subject><subject>Chemists</subject><subject>Cognition & reasoning</subject><subject>College Faculty</subject><subject>College Science</subject><subject>Curricula</subject><subject>Definitions</subject><subject>Formalism</subject><subject>Logical Thinking</subject><subject>Organic Chemistry</subject><subject>Pushing</subject><subject>Reaction mechanisms</subject><subject>Reasoning</subject><subject>Respondents</subject><subject>Science education</subject><subject>Science Instruction</subject><subject>Skill development</subject><subject>Skills</subject><subject>Textbooks</subject><issn>0021-9584</issn><issn>1938-1328</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNplkE9Lw0AQxRdRsFYPfgBhQTx4iM5ms8nGm5TWP1Qq1p7DZjq12zZZ3U0PfntTIkXwMgPzfrzHPMbOBdwIiMUtzSVAlqr1AeuJXOpIyFgfsh60YpQrnRyzkxBWACJWue6xyci7ik_d1iPxxvGprdd3_IVwaWobGov8jUxwta0_-CzsZrMkPtwQNt7V0es2LHfHkfOV2dhQnbKjhdkEOvvdfTYbDd8Hj9F48vA0uB9HRkLeRKQFxiUIyjBFobJSKTUnxNSkxpSpQaUSjRSjJikyIREN4AJimCeGAErZZ5ed76d3X1sKTbFqf6jbyEIkSaxBCZW21HVHoXcheFoUn95Wxn8XAopdX8W-r5a96FjyFvfc8LnFdKJlq191usHwJ-yfzw9hZXKm</recordid><startdate>20131008</startdate><enddate>20131008</enddate><creator>Bhattacharyya, Gautam</creator><general>American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc</general><general>Division of Chemical Education, Inc and ACS Publications Division of the American Chemical Society</general><general>American Chemical Society</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20131008</creationdate><title>From Source to Sink: Mechanistic Reasoning Using the Electron-Pushing Formalism</title><author>Bhattacharyya, Gautam</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a309t-e81c2b01e7c6c157b555decc6a6aab6ac5548ce2c8e31713cca0cf020d4ae00b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Articulation</topic><topic>Chemical Education Research</topic><topic>Chemical reactions</topic><topic>Chemistry</topic><topic>Chemists</topic><topic>Cognition & reasoning</topic><topic>College Faculty</topic><topic>College Science</topic><topic>Curricula</topic><topic>Definitions</topic><topic>Formalism</topic><topic>Logical Thinking</topic><topic>Organic Chemistry</topic><topic>Pushing</topic><topic>Reaction mechanisms</topic><topic>Reasoning</topic><topic>Respondents</topic><topic>Science education</topic><topic>Science Instruction</topic><topic>Skill development</topic><topic>Skills</topic><topic>Textbooks</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bhattacharyya, Gautam</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><jtitle>Journal of chemical education</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bhattacharyya, Gautam</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1028483</ericid><atitle>From Source to Sink: Mechanistic Reasoning Using the Electron-Pushing Formalism</atitle><jtitle>Journal of chemical education</jtitle><addtitle>J. Chem. Educ</addtitle><date>2013-10-08</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>90</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>1282</spage><epage>1289</epage><pages>1282-1289</pages><issn>0021-9584</issn><eissn>1938-1328</eissn><coden>JCEDA8</coden><abstract>Since the introduction of Morrison and Boyd’s textbook in organic chemistry over 50 years ago, reaction mechanisms and mechanistic reasoning using the electron-pushing formalism (EPF) have become a mainstay of organic chemistry courses. In recent years there have even been several papers in this Journal and others detailing research on how students attend to various aspects of this formalism. However, there are no explicit articulations of a definition or framework in the chemical or science education research literature on mechanistic reasoning using EPF. Although practicing chemists intuitively know what constitutes mechanistic reasoning, this paper presents results of a nationwide study of organic chemistry faculty regarding their understanding and use of this technique. Although a consensus definition did not emerge from this research, there were several common features to them. These features suggest an activity that has a back-of-the-envelope quality meant to generate possible pathways based on established patterns of reactivity. Consistent with this view, the experts’ focus for skills required to develop dexterity in this type of mechanistic reasoning was on applied ones rather than those that are more theoretical in nature. Finally, the principal uses of mechanistic reasoning using EPF, according to the respondents, are to explain and predict outcomes of chemical processes.</abstract><cop>Easton</cop><pub>American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc</pub><doi>10.1021/ed300765k</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0021-9584 |
ispartof | Journal of chemical education, 2013-10, Vol.90 (10), p.1282-1289 |
issn | 0021-9584 1938-1328 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1442805156 |
source | ACS Publications |
subjects | Articulation Chemical Education Research Chemical reactions Chemistry Chemists Cognition & reasoning College Faculty College Science Curricula Definitions Formalism Logical Thinking Organic Chemistry Pushing Reaction mechanisms Reasoning Respondents Science education Science Instruction Skill development Skills Textbooks |
title | From Source to Sink: Mechanistic Reasoning Using the Electron-Pushing Formalism |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-13T00%3A40%3A00IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=From%20Source%20to%20Sink:%20Mechanistic%20Reasoning%20Using%20the%20Electron-Pushing%20Formalism&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20chemical%20education&rft.au=Bhattacharyya,%20Gautam&rft.date=2013-10-08&rft.volume=90&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=1282&rft.epage=1289&rft.pages=1282-1289&rft.issn=0021-9584&rft.eissn=1938-1328&rft.coden=JCEDA8&rft_id=info:doi/10.1021/ed300765k&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3102389951%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1442805156&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ1028483&rfr_iscdi=true |