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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of chemical education 2013-10, Vol.90 (10), p.1282-1289
1. Verfasser: Bhattacharyya, Gautam
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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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