INTRODUCTION

Mathematics is used widely in chemistry as well as all other sciences.Mathematical

calculations are absolutely necessary to explore important concepts in chemistry

without some basic mathematics skills,there calculations,and therefore chemistry itself

will be extremely difficult.However,with a basic knowledge of some of the mathematics

that will be used in your chemistry course,you will be well prepared to deal with the

concepts and theories of chemistry.

Chemists use math for a variety of tasks.Math is also used to calculate energy in

reactions,compression of a gas,grams needed to add to a solution to reach desired

concentration,and quantities of reactants needed to reach a desired product.

Mathematics is an important tool for the sciences,and it is the responsibility of

mathematics department to provide undergraduates with the quantitiative background

that they need to succeed in their science courses.

As the Mathematical Association of America envisions the future of mathematics

education, the discipline of mathematics should not be considered in a vacuum.

Mathematics is an important tool for the sciences, and it is the responsibility of

mathematics departments to provide undergraduates with the quantitative background

that they need to succeed in their science courses. This applies to students who are

only taking a few mathematics courses and are majoring in a scientific field, as well as

to students who are double majoring in mathematics and science. This study group

focused on the relationship between mathematics and chemistry. The goal of this report

is to help mathematics departments strengthen their programs by offering suggestions

about how mathematics and chemistry can be coordinated better in the undergraduate
curriculum. In particular, we would like to provide some guidelines as to how

mathematics departments can work with chemistry departments to offer a variety of

possible courses and programs that would benefit students in each of the disciplines.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

A large body of literature exists that examines and the relationship of indicators of those

characteristics.This existing research literature broadly views without illuminating

specific areas,such as mathematics and science.In an effort to focus the literature

based for researches and policymakers more narrowly,this review specifically examines

as it relates to mathemartics and science teaching and learning.The review highlights

key policy and practitioner perspectives,provides a focused synthesis on current

research findings on mathematics and science,and suggests araes of research that are

limited in the literature.

For educators in different positions within the educational system, teacher quality takes

on different meanings. For the classroom teacher, teacher quality may be viewed as a

continuous process of self-renewal and professional development where one works to

impact and improve the quality of one’s own teaching. A teacher educator may view a

quality teacher as one who has a strong foundational knowledge of content and

pedagogy that can be built upon and strengthened throughout his or her career. With

these perspectives in mind, it is easy to see how different views have emerged within

the construct of teacher quality. Yet within these perspectives are overlapping themes

which indicate that, perhaps, what appears on the surface to be a divergence of views

actually masks a lack of clarity about what is meant by and known about teacher quality.

Because of these differing perspectives, researchers, policymakers, and educators

policy statements, and educational initiatives and interventions. Although other authors

have reviewed the body of literature that identifies and examines variables believed to

be indicators of teacher quality and the relationship of these variables to teacher

effectiveness (Rice, 2003; Wayne & Youngs, 2003), this existing literature broadly

reviews teacher quality research without specific emphasis on any subject area. In an

effort to bring together and focus these different literatures, this article specifically

examines teacher quality as it relates to mathematics and science teaching and student

outcomes. Our purpose was to create a document that could be used by researchers,

policymakers, and educators as a summary of current findings on mathematics and

science teacher quality. In the sections that follow, we outline our methodology for

selecting documents for inclusion, provide a synthesis on mathematics and science

teacher quality from these documents, and summarize key findings from the research.

The final section discusses general implications and suggests areas for further

research. One important item to note is that the scope of this review did not seek to

encompass all variables, actions, influences, and conditions of mathematics and

science teacher quality. The primary goal of our article was to focus on individual

characteristics of teachers. Therefore, the selection of literature distinguished between

those studies that focused on characteristics of individual mathematics and science

teachers and those that focused on characteristics of the teacher population. For

example, research on characteristics of the teacher population that may influence

teacher quality, such as the recruitment of a diverse teaching force and the supply and

demand of the mathematics and science teacher population, was not part of this review.
Although these broader issues are important, an examination of population

characteristics of teachers and teacher quantity was beyond the scope of this article.

This review provides a systematic and focused examination of the teacher quality

literature as it relates to characteristics of mathematics and science teachers and

student outcomes.

DISCUSSION

Science is a body of knowledge about the universe.Mathematics is a language that

candescribe relationships and change in relationships in rational way.Science generally

uses mathematics as a tool to describe science.A few scientists like Galileo and Albert

Einstein believe that the laws of the universe are mathematical.

In many ways math is closely related to science.Mathematics is a scholarly domain,and

so the mathematical community works as the scientific community does-mathematicians

buld on each others work and behave in ways that push the discipline forward.This

progress contributes to scientific breakthroughs.Scientific theory is always expressed in

mathematical language.Mathematics is the science that deals with the logic of

shape,quantity,and arrangement.

Although chemistry was practiced from the dawn of civilization as the discipline to

create materials,including the extraction of metals,it was more of a craft of artisans than

a subject of enquiry into the fundamental.Physics,in contrast,evolved very

rapidlyasan‘exact’science,where the fundamental laws of motion got quantified and

predictions were precise enough to distinguish between the rival conceptual

frameworks.The major reason why chemistry developed into an exact science relatively
late is that the underlying laws of binding and transformations of chemical substances

have their basis in the quantum behavior of the constituents of matter.

Scientific theory is always expressed in mathematical language. Modeling is done via

the mathematical formulation using computational algorithms with the observations

providing initial data for the model and serving as a check on the accuracy of the model.

Modeling is used to predict behavior and in doing so validate the theory or raise new

questions as to the reasonableness of the theory and often suggests the need of

sharper experiments and more focused observations. Thus, observation and

experiment, theory, and modeling reinforce each other and together lead to our

understanding of scientific phenomena. As with data mining, the other approaches are

only successful if there is close collaboration between mathematical scientists and the

other disciplinarians. Dr. Margaret Wright of Bell Labs and Professor Alexandre Chorin

of the University of California-Berkeley (both past and present members of the Advisory

Committee for the Directorate for Mathematical and Physical Sciences) volunteered to

address the need for this interplay between the mathematical sciences and other

sciences and engineering in a report to the Division of Mathematical Sciences. Their

report identifies six themes where there is opportunity for interaction between the

mathematical sciences and other sciences and engineering, and goes one to give

examples where these themes are essential for the research. These examples

represent only a few of the many possibilities. Further, the report addresses the need to

rethink how we train future scientists, engineers, and mathematical scientists. The

report illustrates that some mathematical scientists, through collaborative efforts in

research, will discover new and challenging problems. In turn, these problems will open
whole new areas of research of interest and challenge to all mathematical scientists.

The fundamental mathematical and statistical development of these new areas will

naturally cycle back and provide new and substantial tools for attacking scientific and

engineering problems. The report is exciting reading. The Division of Mathematical

Sciences is greatly indebted to Dr. Wright and Professor Chorin for their effort.

Mathematics and science1 have a long and close relationship that is of crucial and

growing importance for both. Mathematics is an intrinsic component of science, part of

its fabric, its universal language and indispensable source of intellectual tools.

Reciprocally, science inspires and stimulates mathematics, posing new questions,

engendering new ways of thinking, and ultimately conditioning the value system of

mathematics. Fields such as physics and electrical engineering that have always been

mathematical are becoming even more so. Sciences that have not been heavily

mathematical in the past---for example, biology, physiology, and medicine---are moving

from description and taxonomy to analysis and explanation; many of their problems

involve systems that are only partially understood and are therefore inherently

uncertain, demanding exploration with new mathematical tools. Outside the traditional

spheres of science and engineering, mathematics is being called upon to analyze and

solve a widening array of problems in communication, finance, manufacturing, and

business. Progress in science, in all its branches, requires close involvement and

strengthening of the mathematical enterprise; new science and new mathematics go

hand in hand. The present document cannot be an exhaustive survey of the interactions

between mathematics and science. Its purpose is to present examples of scientific

advances made possible by a close interaction between science and mathematics, and
draw conclusions whose validity should transcend the examples. We have labeled the

examples by words that describe their scientific content; we could have chosen to use

mathematical categories and reached the very same conclusions. A section labeled

“partial differential equations” would have described their roles in combustion,

cosmology, finance, hybrid system theory, Internet analysis, materials science, mixing,

physiology, iterative control, and moving boundaries; a section on statistics would have

described its contributions to the analysis of the massive data sets associated with

cosmology, finance, functional MRI, and the Internet; and a section on computation

would have conveyed its key role in all areas of science. This alternative would have

highlighted the mathematical virtues of generality and abstraction; the approach we

have taken emphasizes the ubiquity and centrality of mathematics from the point of view

of science.

Mathematical breakthroughs contribute to new discoveries in mathematics and often to

new research methods in standard sciences like biology, chemistry, and physics. Even

mathematical knowledge that is developed purely abstractly, without any thought

towards potential scientific applications, frequently turns out to be useful in scientific

research. 

CONCLUSION

None of the theorems which Steiner demonstrates is immediate without the idea of the

‘power of a point’,but all are almost obvious with it.How it makes these things obvious is

not by supplying some previously unknown property of some geometrical object,but by

supplying a kind of organizational principle,a pattern to look for,something providing

between Euclid and Steiner makes it clear that the difference between them is not so

much knowledge as it is perspective and how they perceive what it is they are doing

when they do mathematics.The ability to take a pattern as a starting point,even if one

might say that if truth is a great ocean,as Newton put it,surely Euclid and Steiner stood

in opposite shores.

Strong ties between mathematics and the sciences exist and are thriving, but there

need to be many more. To enhance scientific progress, such connections should

become pervasive, and it is sound scientific policy to foster them actively. It is especially

important to make connections between mathematics and the sciences more timely.

Scientists and engineers should have access to the most recent mathematical tools,

while mathematicians should be privy to the latest thinking in the sciences. In an earlier

era of small science, Einstein could use the geometry of LeviCivita within a few years of

its invention. With today's vastly expanded scientific enterprise and increased

specialization, new discoveries in mathematics may remain unknown to scientists and

engineers for extended periods of time; already the analytical and numerical methods

used in several scientific fields lag well behind current knowledge. Similarly,

collaborations with scientists are essential to make mathematicians aware of important

problems and opportunities.

REFERENCES

shodor.org/UNChem/math/index.html

maa.org/sites/default/files/ChemistryandMathematics.pdf
www.tandfonline.com>doi>abs

www.quora.com

undscie.berkeley.edu/article/mathematics

nsf.gov/pubs/2000/mps0001/mps0001.pdf