Teach to Search

George Pimentel was a wonderful man, whose heart and soul were in chemistry. And just as much in research, in which he excelled, as in teaching. From his writing it is clear that he did not separate the two. Nor do I, which is why I am happy and proud to be associated with an award given in George Pimentel’s name, and especially one in chemical education. I will speak of two themes: • The inseparability of teaching and research. And for that matter, of chemistry and the world. • The necessity of chemists to teach broadly, to speak to the general public. And the tensions that arise in the process. But before I launch into these subjects, let me say some words about how I feel about teaching and receiving this award. Whatever success I have had I owe to teaching. The logic or rhetoric of teaching underlies my research within chemistry and my writing outside of chemistry. As I began to think about this, I felt suddenly a little less guilty about receiving an award in chemical education. Let me tell you why I felt—feel—guilty. What am I—viewed by the community of chemistry as a researcher whose work has received ample recognition—doing getting an award that should be given to those who have toiled so hard, dedicating their lives to chemical education? When there aren’t too many of these awards around . . . A second source of guilt for me is that I suspect that a significant component in the thinking of the Pimentel award committee was my role in making the Annenberg/CPB television course in chemistry, The World of Chemistry. I was a member of the team, indeed, and my soul and sweat went into the project. But the part I played—more than just being a pretty face, true—was in fact much smaller than the parts of several other people, who really deserve recognition. I will tell you about those people in time.