Reading some authors, you would think a  “WOW” moment in chemistry at the age of 14 or so, is an event that makes such a massive impact in the way you feel about taking the chemistry A level exam per year, is this good evidence for such a claim? They also usually choose chemistry as a prerequisite for other studies, eg medicine.  I was fortunate if I had 2 students (per hundred cohort) moving on to read chemistry at university.

Chemistry teachers  are fortunate to have at hand some eye-catching demonstrations which they can  parade in front of students. However, we are also persuaded (by school managers) to exhibit these “wow” moments during open evenings to inspire new students and their parents and to spark interest in primary school students visiting a school the year before they attend. There have been some unfortunate incidents in these events usually caused by poor procedure. Explosions and fire have been known to scare younger students and upset adult visitors alike. (Our work at CLEAPSS involves investigating these incidents and from our findings, develop new and improved control measures to make procedures safer but not reduce any impact of the demonstration. CLEAPSS does not ban experiments but interpretation of UK safety and environmental legislation has made big differences to many of the older methods.

UK Law places the responsibility of safety at work on the employer (usually a non-scientist). A teacher is an employee. A student is a visitor. The teacher has to carry out risk assessment on behalf of his employer and follow control measures in any “wow” experiment to ensure bot employees and visitors are safe. My organization, on working on behalf of their employer, assists teachers in this procedure but incidents still happen. A Whoosh bottle explodes rather than goes “Whoosh”. An explosive vapour/air mixture has formed in the bottle because of a delay in igniting the contents, once the bottle had been primed. Hence, we note in our risk assessment, the control measure that teachers “Do not delay the ignition process. (This usually happens to save preparation time or a long introduction) Issues have arisen if bottles are left to stand before ignition”.

carelessly Loud bangs, fire, ultra-cold liquid gases, extremely bright light, corrosive liquids, nasty smells, slimy liquids are fascinating but some people are scared due to past traumas. Teachers do not know what traumatic events might have occurred a child’s past. “Hands over ears” for a hydrogen oxygen balloon in a Hall or dynamite soap bubbles in a lab. Some would call this “woke” but what if a child has recently been at a funeral of a grandparent or worse still, a sibling, and the teacher talks about cremating a jelly baby?

​Consummate performers who carry out demos as a profession, do loads of rehearsal. Demonstrators range from the “sage on stage” to the bumbling clown, via the whacky professor (with crazy hair and bow tie!)  Have you seen how adult spectators over-react to chemistry demos on TV? (Please do not get me started on the depiction of mad scientists in chemistry labs in TV and film dramas!). Teachers are not at school to entertain but to teach; by all means, make the experience enjoyable and they must rehearse the procedure. And as one Irish comedian used to say "It's the way you tell 'em. Chemistry is not magic but you can learn a lot from stage magicians how to build up tension in the audience. 

​Does a seven year old really understand that a gas can exist as a liquid at -196°C? That a tennis ball at this temperature does not bounce but splinters into many pieces. Others will like the white fumes of dry ice in hot water, because that looks like “science” on films and TV. There is no harm in this so long as presenters do not throw liquid nitrogen over the audience, pour it along the floor with children seated a few yards away or reduce the oxygen content of the room. Other than looking like a firework, what does a thermit reaction show an eleven-year old?
A chemical demonstration should not appear as magic, a sleight of hand; in education there should be a rational explanation that makes sense of what happens to the audience. A liquid suddenly changes from colourless to black because it is a clock reaction. In teaching, a students should learn from applying their senses to a demonstration not just be entertained.

There are more than 5 senses but the these are the ones by which students experience an event. With touch and tasting experiences, the demonstrator has to be very careful;

​The students (and teachers) are experiencing chemistry in day to day life, from washing their hands and face (surfactants and precipitates) to using their mobile phones (over sixty different elements being used.). When the teacher points this out, we might get a “micro-wow” reaction. I often prefer a series of “micro-wows” rather than one big one. I can see this in adults when I lead them through a series of microchemistry activities in a workshop. (It brings me great satisfaction!). 

I am told that micro and small-scale chemistry, cannot have “wow” moment. On a personal level I am always astounded at what I see close up,
My introductory experiment to adults is making a universal indicator. This is all done on a polypropylene folder with the worksheet inside. There are 25 reactions. Teachers see how a Universal indicator works and Technicians see there is no washing up of test tubes afterwards and both are amazed how beautifully it is presented on the plastic surface: a triple micro-wow make a big “wow”! . As an introduction for students, teachers could extend the method to discovery with natural products from the garden. Every flowerhead, coloured leaf or fruit skin is a universal indicator. Everyone knows about red cabbage but try butterfly-pea tea, dark-coloured petunias or the coloured oxalis or tradescantia leaves. 

Add magnesium to iron(II) sulfate sol and you see iron forming on the metal (which makes it attracted to a magnet (red object in the right of the photo)) but there is a consecutive reaction as bubbles of gas (hydrogen) and a green precipitate appear changing to brown as air oxidizes  iron(II) hydroxide to iron(III) hydroxide. Iron acts as a catalyst on the surface of magnesium to increase the rate of the magnesium/water reaction to produce the hydrogen and iron(II) hydroxide.
“Is this supposed to happen?” is the wonderful question from students. As though particles enjoy carrying out reactions with the sole purpose to mislead students. The challenge is how to interpret these effects using the invisible particles (ions and molecules) in action. It will challenge teachers because results are not always as the textbook/specification suggests they should be. 

Am I over complicating the subject? Consecutive and secondary reactions often occur alongide the main reacionin chemistry. The authors of text books hardly ever mention them. What we do in these reactions is not to stir them but to let the particles do the work and then we get many more micro-wows as we observe the results of random motion and collisions of invisible particles. We like to give the impression that Chemistry is a right and wrong subject. It is not. It is fuzzy.  These micro-wows (see below) enthuse not only the student but the teaching staff as well.

And with this comes a holistic approach to looking at chemistry through areas which reflect the complexity of life because of the interaction of the subject with non-chemists and society. This is called systems thinking and I used to cover this in courses such as Science in Society, a AO and AS level course for those in Y12 during the 70s and 80s. ​This can garner a response which I will call “anti-wow” when students and adults are so overwhelmed by the issues in the world, they turn their backs on science. I first saw this with the hippie movement in the 1960s cause by the impact of nuclear weapons on society and ease to which drugs such as LSD could be made and provided. Now there are active science deniers and conspiracy theorists commentating on vaccination, climate change etc. 
On the other hand though:
Humans have the capacity to solve problems and provide answers. Examples such as  such as wind farms, solar panels, batteries to drive cars, extract rare elements from ever decreasing supplies, make plastics from other sources, use oil in a responsible way etc, provide ant-viral drugs, many of which were unheard of 10 years ago.

​Teachers often claim that the micro approach disadvantages the students because the procedures do not appear in exam questions. Well, nor are Whoosh bottles and Howling Jelly babies (combustion, redox), elephants toothpaste (rate of reaction, catalysis, decomposition, redox) and Thermite (redox, displacement) yet they are still shown by teachers. The ramifications of chemistry in society, (the hinterland) is vast. It invites the question from students ”do I need to know this for the exam?”.
Examinations answers usually hinge on correct-word answers or calculations but in real-life, the hinterland of chemistry is fuzzy and answers in the hinterland area require discussion through extended essay. These are not easy to mark. 

Aspects of science may have caused these environmental and health issues. However, the answers lie in science but the moral, ethical, and economic will has to be there. as well and politicians have to bring it all together. As I write, the general public are having to be dragged kicking and screaming to update their cars, just as they were when smokeless fuels were introduced, we all had to wear safety belts in cars, told to stop smoking cigarettes, to follow lockdown procedures and have vaccinations etc. 
Communicating chemistry to the general public is an artform in itself. The image is poor and we do not have a charismatic figure or National; Treasure such as Brian Cox or David Attenborough in our ranks, I do not think we do ourselves any favours by just relying on "WOW" experiences based on the senses alone in broadcasting and writing.

A Tweet pointed me to a Journal of Chemical Education paper written in open access (thank goodness). It was called Chemistry Education Research at a Crossroads: Where Do We Need to Go Now? By Ryan D. Sweeder*, Deborah G. Herrington, and Olivia M. Crandell in J Chem. Educ. 2023, 100, 5, 1710–1715. In the opening paragraph it says;

“Although substantial progress has been made in identifying evidence-based strategies to support the learning of chemistry, we have yet to realize widespread systemic change regarding how chemistry is taught at the high school or college levels”.

it appears that with all the time and money spent in research in University Chemistry Education departments, the consequence of the research findings has little impact on the teaching of the subject in schools. Teachers are often teaching today in the same manner as they did 10 or more years ago. They only change if at the behest of their school manager, via outside inspection or changes in examination curriculum. In traditional practical work, there has been little change in the procedure of many standard practical sessions eg preparation of copper(II) sulfate crystals but see this. 

 I am not an academic, because I do not work at a university, but as the CLEAPSS (old) senior chemistry advisor, I think I have had more influence in teaching practical chemistry in UK schools than I would if I had worked in a University.

• First with alternative practical methods to traditional methods, brought about by safety improvements demanded by adherence to UK Safety Law (usually the COSHH Regulations).
• Secondly, the small and microscale approach which has further implications on classroom management and pedagogy.

It was achieved by using social media as our means of communication direct with the teachers. Photos, diagrams and snappy videos make an immediate impact with busy technicians and teachers on Twitter, LinkedIn, and Facebook. ​
Similarly, David Paterson, with whom I wrote the book,  has had similar success with integrating instructions. For this work we have both received the RSC prize for Education.
David also used short articles in Education in Chemistry and Declan Fleming used and improved on many of these practical ideas in Education in Chemistry. 

We have both had an article published J Chem Ed. Prof Bruce Mattson liked my diffusing precipitates but it took us 3 years to get it into print. He had to use an extremely contrived before-and-after questionnaire amongst his students on the behest of a reviewer. It was finally accepted and the editor seemed to like it so much it was featured in the front cover (see Fig 1). David produced this a paper on Integrated Instructions. 
​​​Papers to these Journals are "peer reviewed". However, our peer reviewers are the teachers and technicians themselves repeating the techniques and the using integrated worksheets we had presented online. They spread the word and add ideas. I only use my twitter for chemistry and have over 5000 followers. David has a similar number.
Fig 2 shows the citations and views to my article in J Chem Ed in comparison to followers on Twitter 

However, there is another reason for why we have yet to realize widespread systemic change regarding how chemistry is taught at the high school and the  paper contained the answer.
"… we must identify what constitutes success. Perhaps it is the ability of students to create causal mechanistic explanations for novel phenomena or to understand and interpret how complex chemical systems such as the environment respond to stresses. Defining “success” must then influence assessments such as the ACS Exams or Chemistry AP exams, which will influence WHAT is taught in chemistry courses."
In the UK, school success is defined by the GCSE and A level exam syllabus driven by the National Curriculum (different names in Scotland). Teachers cannot go wandering of into the Hinterland with Green Chemistry and Climate change because students will ask ”Do I need to know this for the exam?” and school managers will be questioning a teachers ability “to keep to the script” as exam success has an influence on school performance and funding.
It has taken me about 30 years to have a measure of acceptability of microscale ideas in school chemistry. The main issue in every country is relating these practical ideas with what is demanded for assessment in National examinations. If an establishment sets its own exams, it is not such a problem.
The main goal in developing microscale techniques was to make practicals safer so they would not be banned under Health and Safety Law but other advantages soon followed in  taking a shorter time to perform, allowing  more teaching time, answering issues which students find puzzling in chemistry, answering the green and sustainability agenda and yet be just as enjoyable to perform.
That article contained the concept of "Backward Design" and it urged me to think of a rather nice presentation (Fig 4) In which I work backwards in time. I realised I had started some ideas in the 1980s when I was teaching and to even remembering what I had to do in my school education. And that none of this journey planned at the outset. 

Teachers and Techncians often ask where they can obtain the kit for microscale chemistry. There is no actual kit.

A Radmaste kit (https://www.radmaste.org.za/) was sent to schools by the Royal Society of Chemistry in 1999. The Equipment was “alien” to many teachers and technicians although we know some people have used it. One issue is obtaining specialised replacement parts which can be quite expensive.
The microchemistry procedures that I carry out, use established laboratory equipment but sometimes I “borrow” equipment from other sciences; example, plastic Petri dishes, usually used in biology, and 3 way taps used in medicine. This is what makes "alien" to those brought up with the traditional equipment.

However, I have sometimes developed and made equipment such as the sprit burner, colorimeter and conductivity indicator.

Modern technology (encapsulated in STEM education) has miniaturised a lot of electrical equipment, enabled the production of “new” materials such as carbon fibre, plastic folders etc and 3D printing has enabled us to even design bespoke equipment. Chemistry equipment is still very traditional in outlook and use. A mantra always used in designing microscale procedures is that it has to offer more than the traditional method. It is why, although available, there is no preparative organic microscale equipment used.

Thee are many versions of the equipment that follows that you can use.

 I read in Education in Chemistry from Kristy Turner and Nathan Owston that many students draw the curly arrow coming from hydrogen ions or positive (electron deficient) species rather than a particle with a lone pair of electrodes. There could be two factors here, one chemical and anthropomorphic,

1. our reliance on the Lowery-Bronsted and Arrhenius definitions of acids and bases in our courses to the detriment of the Lewis definition and
2. a deep-seated love of the “positive (good)” and wariness of the “negative (bad)”, a sort of hidden-anthropomorphic effect which challenges our common sense.

Every so often, you might be asked to look at a new curriculum for teaching chemistry. “Let’s start with a clean sheet of paper” only to find you end up with err, what you had when you started. It is very diffiult to remove certain items.
But one aspect you can change is the practical side of chemistry and bring it up to date.

I have been asked to contribute (amongst other contributions) to a Royal Society of Chemistry  book on Creative Chemistry. I jotted down some thoughts and sent them back. It has been edited well but I thought it might be useful to add more here. is there such a thing as "Creativity" in school chemistry?

If you you would to see how you and your students can make these halos and how they can help in teaching more about how cheksiry works, then read on.

Mounting the barrier of understanding between the macro event in a chemistry event and the interpretation at the nano level is one the most difficult achievements for both the student and the teacher..

Where does the chemistry teacher start with chemistry? The typical traditional start in  UK schools was with the destructive nature of the Bunsen burner with safety to introduce practical work and then onto elements, mixtures and compounds (which is quite a difficult concept) with separation techniques.

One on the objections to devising new equipment or novel procedures is the cry from some teachers that students will be at a disadvantage because the examiners will not ask questions about that procedure in the exam.
There has to be an overwhelming reason to me for changing a procedure including safety, reducing expenditure, improved classroom management, increasing the efficient use of time, more informative chemistry, gaining more insight to chemical processes and responding to the findings in chemical education research. On our CLEAPSS Helpline we get many enquiries about experiments not going as well as "the book" describes. I also mean by “the book” the suggested Examination Board procedures. In the UK, we have moved to a skill assessment of student's practical ability but the Boards still print out "suggested procedures" which we know at CLEAPSS to have flaws. Flaws that have been there for years and no one addresses.
The indestructible crucible is a case in point.

My microscale activities have to add something extra that traditional procedures cannot normally achieve. This can range from ease of presentation, better classroom management to, what I consider the most important, provide further evidence to students in how chemicals interact to form new substances.
On twitter, these little videos and photos can circle the world from London to Phoenix, Auckland, Sydney, Hong Kong, Ankara, Salzburg to Bolton back in the UK. I do not get many hits on the whole and if I reach 1000, it is very gratifying but two videos seemed to hit the spot recently. The video with the formation of the red slash of the iron-thiocyanate complex has achieved about 4,500 media engagements (MEs).

Let the particles do the work, part 2
CLEAPSS devised a simple small electrical conductivity indicator. The resistor in the circuit limits the current to protect the Light Emitting Diode (LED). The carbon fibre-rod electrodes are very strong unlike graphite.

Chemistry is difficult to teach. You have frustrating moments when you want to hit your head against the wall and go home saying “is it because of me, they don’t understand?”
I picked up an old book of mine published 1977. One Chapter starts “You are perhaps puzzled why is a free energy change, rather than the enthalpy change, which is a measure of the ability of a reaction to do work.” Wonderful! Here is an author sympathising with the student (and teacher) that our subject is hard. Thankfully, I am not alone.
Those words were written by Alex H Johnstone and G Webb in the book, “Energy, Chaos, and Chemical Change”. Nobody writes these types of books now. At 110 pages, aimed at the teacher and the 6th form to undergraduate level, it just not cost effective for publishers. You would find this sort of material on the web nowadays. We dash things off in a couple of days (well some people do). I suspect this book took several months of care. It also requires careful but provides rewarding reading. The words are simple but the concept is deep. I often had (and still do) to go back to it because thermodynamics in chemistry is difficult.​
​I was at a meeting of 40 chemistry teachers, having been invited to do a microscale workshop, with Professor David Read. David asked the teachers “How many of you have heard of Johnstone’s triangle”. (My version is on the right.) David is modern, he has electronic measuring equipment and they had to press a button, so we saw the answer immediately. Only one teacher had heard of it. When he put the triangle on the board, you could see flashing light bulbs coming from 39 heads. In this simple diagram, Alex Johnstone encapsulated the issues of teaching chemistry.

For years, I have tried to ensure practical chemistry is enjoyable, but not neccessarily just for fun. Fun chemistry is enjoyable but you do not learn anything from it. Enjoyable chemistry occurs when you learn, understand, have light-bulb moments, bells ring and memories come back of something you had observed but could not explain, now explained. A knowing smile beams across your face.

I have just returned from Japan. I had been invited by Professor Kazuko Ogino (seated centre) along with Professor Jorge Ibanez from Mexico, Professor Supawan Tantayanon from Thailand (see Feb 2016 blog), Dr Abdulazziz Alnajarr from Kuwait and Dr Marie Dutoit from South Africa, who pioneered  the MyLab chemistry kit. There were invited Japanese University lecturers and schoolteachers from Japan as well. What we had in common was a passion for the microscale approach to chemistry in both education and research.