 |
David Cartrette, Assistant Professor
Photo:
[ VIEW IMAGE ]
Organic Chemistry/Chemical Education
Phone: (605) 688-6480
Fax: (605) 688-6295
E-mail: David_Cartrette@sdstate.edu
Education
B.A., 1992, North Carolina State University
B.S., 1992, North Carolina State University
M.S., 1997, Western Carolina University
Ph.D., 2003, Purdue University
Chemistry is a field that has experienced tremendous growth in the past forty years. These days, it may seem difficult to find research initiatives that are considered solely within the realm of chemistry. Applications of chemistry to the life sciences, agriculture, engineering, materials science, art, cosmetics, and education show us just how relevant chemistry is to our everyday lives. My research interests are at the interface of chemistry and education. Within this area of chemistry, there has been a great deal of research activity that has focused on high school and first year college chemistry teaching and learning. It is a goal of my research to expand our understanding of how organic chemistry and biochemistry students learn and understand these subjects.
My doctoral study focused on how graduate students and faculty of organic chemistry interpret combined spectral analysis problems (using IR and 1H NMR spectroscopy). Some of
the findings from that study indicated that the more successful participants generally used a consistent approach when attacking the problem, made better use of coupling information within the 1H NMR spectrum, moved easily between spectral and molecular representation levels, and always took the time to check their answers against the physical data from the spectra.
The implications for instruction are powerful based on these and other findings; if we know how the “top tier” of organic chemists approach these types of problems, teachers of organic chemistry can better anticipate and circumvent problems the typical sophomore student might have. I would like to continue this line of research to investigate how sophomores (to whom the subject of spectroscopic interpretation has just been introduced) and seniors solve the same kinds of problems. In so doing, the chemistry education community may better understand the transitions in problem solving style students encounter as they move through their university training. Other possible topics for research in this arena include mechanistic understanding, prediction of reaction products or conditions, and elucidation of complex synthetic pathways.
Another area of interest is student retention and use of information learned when going from one level of chemistry to the next. It appears that for many students, there is no clear connection between general chemistry and organic chemistry, and again between organic chemistry and biochemistry.
For instance, do students understand that a carbonyl group in an organic molecule can easily be oxidized or reduced in a test tube, but when that carbonyl group is part of a biomolecule undergoing an enzymatic reaction, does it behave similarly? Do students relate the two concepts, and if so, how? If not, why not? Would a more unified teaching approach throughout the chemistry curriculum be of benefit to student learning and understanding? These areas are worth further investigation, such that teachers of chemistry can better understand where our students’ understandings might be compromised.
Publications:
Smith, Beverly B.; Cartrette, David; Kwochka, William R.; et al., 2002, Synthesis of [n]- and [n.n] Cyclophanes by Using Suzuki-Miyaura Coupling. J. Org. Chem., (67) 15, 5333-5337.
Cartrette, David P. & Bodner, George M., 2003, Non-Mathematical problem solving in organic chemistry, J. Res. Sci. Teaching. In press.
Cartrette, David P. & Bodner, George M. 2003, Problem solving strategies used in deducing molecular structure from spectroscopic data, J. Chem. Ed. In press.
|
|
