I teach AP Chemistry and I know several of my students need all the help they can get. I created a class website, making sure to include several pages to the best quality chemistry podcast-type videos I could find. While Khan isn't perfect by any means, I find his videos to be an excellent backup explanation to the topics we discuss in class. I separated his videos into categories that reflect the different units we cover so its was easier for the kids to find a link that meets their needs. I know one of my seniors last year found his website invaluable to pass a college algebra class that switched teachers mid-year, leaving the kids without the best instructor. Sometimes it's nice to have a second voice explaining a topic (we even swap students for tutoring between teachers for this reason), so I think his efforts are on the right track. There are three sets which are of very good quality for AP Chem - the NMSI AP Chem videos, Khan, and a site called Chemguy.com. Even college students in their 100 and 200 level classes would benefit from his offerings.

One huge thing I have concerns about is the concept of the "flipped classroom" where kids are expected to go home and watch some online video and then expected to go into to class tomorrow well-versed on the topic and ready for some activity. Many higher-order topics need that interactive teacher-student discourse to full understand the topic. I've spent entire periods just covering a single free-response question, making sure to cover a number of tangential topics and showing the full spectrum of the question. Two guys named Bergmann and Sams are pushing the flipped classroom in the sciences, but haven't ponied up the numbers to show progress.

In an nutshell, Khan and anyone else who produces quality educational chemistry videos is a resource I will encourage my kids to use. I want it to help support discussion and learning in the classroom, but not replace it.

I teach high school chemistry at one of the highest scoring schools in the state, but I routinely see the same lack of fundamental math skills and investigative thinking that are the basis of science. My colleague has proposed this same question to me, and I was fairly against the use of computers as part of labs for the sake of integrating "technology." They can use a computer to type up the lab report and maybe plug in an Excel graph. I have used statistical packages as part of professional analytical lab work and I can safely say that the concepts behind the math and the significance of the numbers is years beyond a high school curriculum. Computers are great research tools and have great importance in data collection, but these same tasks can be done much more easily with traditional tools.

I have a full classroom set of the Vernier probeware that integrates with the TI calculators, but I won't even think of using this stuff until I have an Advanced Placement class that shows the maturity and attentiveness that it requires. Instead of flashy toys, I prefer to incorporate investigative labs where you are developing your own procedures with as little assistance from me as possible. I really like labs that recreate classic experiments and have the kids use the same basic tools that chemists used 200 years ago. They love the electrochemistry lab where they use Alessandro Volta's tools to figure out the best combination of metals and acid to use to make a battery powerful enough to charege a capacitor. The cap discharges into an old flashbulb to convert chemical energy to electrical energy to thermal energy and light.

Spend more time on the fundamentals of scientific math and scientific thinking - the rest will come much more easily since the groundwork has been laid. I did very well in school because I was shown how to think, not just how to use computers and punch a calculator.