In the Long Term

When faced with some ground-shifts dramatic,
Keep eye on the view panoramic. 
When current aesthetic
Seems “only kinetic,”
Still aim for the thermodynamic.  

I’m taking a break from revisiting April 2025’s poems to reflect on an excellent essay I read recently, written by Jonathan Malesic and published in The Hedgehog Review.  Although my own teaching experience is in science, rather than the humanities, I found the piece to be insightful encouragement in beginning a new academic year. 

One of the closing lines reminded me of a concept I’ve taught in organic chemistry coursework, which gave rise to this particular limerick. (I’ll allow myself some additional words here; this poem is not part of the NaPoWriMo routine, and it relies on a content-dense metaphor.)       

When faced with some ground-shifts dramatic, /
Keep eye on the view panoramic.

Briefly, Malesic’s essay reflects on the disorienting experience of teaching in the time of generative AI, which answers typical assignment prompts and content-related questions within milliseconds.  (What’s more, the results of such processes are now often automatic top results with common search engines— thus, tough to avoid.)  This innovation has required recent “ground-shifts dramatic” in terms of how assignments and evaluations are considered.

I became aware of Malesic’s piece after seeing the moving conclusion posted on social media in the days before my semester began.  He writes, in part:        

“Part of a teacher’s job—certainly in the humanities, but even in professional fields like business—is to help students break out of their prisons, at least for an hour, so they can see and enhance the beauty of their own minds… I will sacrifice some length of my days to add depth to another person’s experience of the rest of theirs. Many did this for me. The work is slow. Its results often go unseen for years. But it is no gimmick.”

Jonathan Malesic, “ChatGPT Is a Gimmick,” in The Hedgehog Review

I was struck by the mention of the timescale of what we aim to achieve in the classroom versus what the goals seem to students. 

Those timescales are often unacknowledged for STEM; I’ve written here before about the frustrating contrast between my biggest syllabus goals (e.g., that an intro chemistry course will help teach critical thinking skills) and what’s actually assessed (narrowly defined chemistry content, often tested via “all-or-nothing” exam questions, such as true/false or multiple-choice). In the moment in the classroom, the focus is on specific, chem-centric concepts and calculations.  Over the course of a lifetime (via a “view panoramic”), the goal is that graduates can confront complex real-world challenges and questions as they arise in and across a variety of subject-matter areas. 

I acknowledge this tension much more now than I did in early years of teaching, but Malesic’s essay was a reminder of how much power is in the direct statement: “The work is slow.  Its results often go unseen for years.”        

When current aesthetic /
Seems “only kinetic,” /
Still aim for the thermodynamic.  

In considering these relative timescales– the days/weeks of the semester vs. the years/decades of a lifetime– I was reminded of a concept from organic chemistry.  The big ideas, generally stated, are these.  Some chemical reactions reliably form multiple products.  In these cases, chemists can manipulate reaction conditions to form one product preferentially.  Overall, as a shorthand: the product that is faster to form is called the kinetic product, while the one that is more energetically stable is called the thermodynamic product.  

For a quick example, see the image below (generalized as a case study from info at this link).  The starting molecule at the left has two places from which a hydrogen atom (H) can be removed, resulting in the formation of a double bond: position A or position B.  We would say position B is more sterically hindered (crowded), due to the presence of the methyl group (CH₃) on that side of the molecule. 

Both products form in both scenarios, but we can influence which product forms more often.  

If we want to form Product A preferentially, we use a bulky base and run the reaction at very low temperatures.  In that case, Product A is faster to form because the incoming base can more easily access the hydrogen atom on that less-crowded side. The low temperatures keep the reactions from reversing.  This is ultimately a kinetic effect (involving the relative activation barriers), so we call Product A the kinetic product. Though it is not as stable long-term, it is faster to form in this scenario.  

If we want to form Product B, we use a more compact base and run the reaction at higher temperatures.  In this case, Product B will be more prevalent because its resulting double bond is more highly substituted in terms of attached alkyl groups, which lends the molecule more energetic stability overall.  The high temperatures allow pertinent reactions to go back and forth until the product with greater overall stability is achieved.  This is ultimately a thermodynamic effect (involving the relative equilibria of the products), so we call Product B the thermodynamic product.  It is slower to form, but it is ultimately more stable over time.  

***

All this (ALL this— thank you to anyone still bearing with me!) to say: the knowledge of a lifetime seems to be the ultimate thermodynamic product.  Again, to Malesic’s point regarding the delay between the moment in the classroom and the payoff across the years, we cannot truly assess lifelong learning on a semester’s timescale.  

That’s frustrating for both students and faculty, working within what can seem an “only kinetic” system, especially as technological shifts impact what assignments and assessments have been traditional indicators before.  However, the long-term view, with its consistent “aim for the thermodynamic,” is helpful to keep in mind, as the fall semester moves into full swing.