Colleagues, 

The Department of Chemistry at Colorado State University is exploring substantial revision to our chemistry major requirements. As we embark on this endeavor, we would like to know if there are institutions whose curriculum closely follows the ACS guidelines and how well it works.  

We would like feedback on chemistry major curricula that have been revised following the current ACS guidelines.  For example, does your curriculum that have true foundational courses in the 5 areas (analytical, biological, inorganic, organic, and physical chemistry) that cover all the recommended material and where students can fulfill the major while omitting ANY of these five in their in-depth curriculum?  If so, have you evaluated how well the new curriculum performs compared to the traditional curriculum? How effective is the new curriculum at providing students with the content knowledge compared to a more traditional curriculum, such as those with mandatory two-semesters of organic and physical?  Do you permit multidisciplinary courses to satisfy in-depth requirements; do students demonstrate competency with key subject knowledge through these courses? Does the new curriculum have any negative impact their overall content knowledge? What benefits do you ascribe to the new curriculum?

This type of information, even if just preliminary or incomplete will be valuable to us as we discuss the merits of updating our curriculum.  And we'd love to be able to follow someone else's lead rather than develop everything from scratch.  I hope to hear back learning that there are excellent programs we can emulate!

Cheers
Nancy Levinger


Nancy E. Levinger - Associate Chair
University Distinguished Teaching Scholar, Professor of Chemistry and Electrical and Computer Engineering
Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO  80523-1872
(970)491-1331; [log in to unmask]
Chair, 2016 Water and Aqueous Solutions Gordon Research Conference; Chair, ACS Division of Physical Chemistry