I believe that teaching good physics and chemistry is enough. Nanotechnology is not a discipline by itselt, it is a subset at best or applied physics and chemistry. These basic disciplines should be taught well and interestingy so as to capture the imagination of the pupils.

I think the knowledge of nanotechnology should be taught children before they receive higher education. Since nanotechnologies have affected science and life.

Some countries are already teaching introductory nanotechnology courses to high school students.. albeit the curriculum and the teachers are mostly from chemistry. IMO it should be physics teachers who must be teaching introductory nano technology classes.. since Physics is the fundamental science.

I agree with both of you. However, are the teachers in high school ready to teach nantechnology in high school? Are there sufficient materials for high school use?

I believe that teaching good physics and chemistry is enough. Nanotechnology is not a discipline by itselt, it is a subset at best or applied physics and chemistry. These basic disciplines should be taught well and interestingy so as to capture the imagination of the pupils.

Agreed with Gyorgy Banhhegyi, a good back ground of basic sciences with some applications of nanotech at school level is sufficient to capture the concept.

Agrees with Gyorgy Banhegyi and Yasir Nawab. MicroTechnology was never taught as a discippline, and we may quickly be into PicoTechnology. Where appropriate, new scientific phenomena should be incorporated into existing prtogrammes.

The idea is not bad if it is included in the courses but the question arises that who will teach? Agree with Gyorgy Banhegyi and Yasir Nawab that the basic courses should be made strong rather to add new sub-disciplines to the high school courses.

Well you all seem to have a point but if the traditional textbooks are to be used, there may not be sufficient data and description for the nanomaterials. What about the properties of the nanomaterials which are not observed in traditional materials? The uses of these new materials are also different from the traditional materials.

It is necessary to understand all the fundamentals ('Big Things') thoroughly before jumping into understanding 'Small Things'.

You may understand if I say 'To Understand/deal the Small Things, a Very Big Mind is Necessary'.

It's just my personal opinion;

Examples that relate to nanoscience and nanotechnology can should be used in chemistry and physics. Even full lessons can be dedicated to this.

But there is no need to introduce a specific subject in high school, nor would it make sense, as too much knowledge from other, more general, areas is required before one can start introducing knowledge that is specific of nanotechnology.

I think that it doesn't need a specific course, since it is not a discipline on its own currently. However, any course at middle or high school level that talks about the applications of the chemistry or physics should include some mention of nanotechnology, and there should be a mention in chemistry of the fact that some materials will have properties that change at the nanoscale so that people are not taken completely by surprise when they discover this. The Boston museum of science had a nanotechnology exhibit that did this quite well, which teachers looking to add some mention of nanotechnology into their curriculums can use for inspiration.

Joydeep, kudos to your response. I agree with you completely. In my travels and presentations in the US and Asia, I had experienced and learned the enthusiasm among the students (university level) to learn the various properties and the existing as well as the possible applications of nanomaterials. And over the past few years, different universities have put up major areas of study in nanotechnology.

I am not much concerned as to which existing course the teachers have to introduce nanotechnology to the students but more on their current status of knowledge and experience about this area. And yes, I agree that there are simple demonstrations (I do this in my talks) that can be presented to students, but there are also very important safety issues that they need to be exposed to and learn before they embark on hands-on introduction to nanomaterials. Hence, my idea is that the teachers must first be given training and education on nanotechnology, their textbooks be updated to include nanotechnology that suits their level of understanding or layman-level books or handbooks be developed, seminars and workshops be arranged, and forums be put up to serve as resources for the teachers who will teach nanotechnology in grade school and in high school. I am confident that given the training and the necessary tools, teachers in chemistry, physics, biology, etc when interested can teach nanotechnology at their students' level of comprehension.

I agree with you, Zoraida. It is fairly important to train the teachers in higher school. Only they have the proper understanding of nanotechnology can the high school students have the course on nanotechnology. At basic level, the nanotechnology is not that hard to understand, it can really help kids develop their imaginations and interests. Nanotechnology has reached every aspect of our life, actually. As a food scientist, I am working with food nanotechnology to resolve some problems. Some of the nanotechnology has already been applied to functional foods, such as nanoemulsions and nanoencapsulation. Also, from the material sides, we have nano-fiber based tennis racket, so on and so forth. Nanotechnology has received more and more attention and may become one of the major directions in future science. Therefore, it is not bad to have some introductory courses on nanotechnology to have the kids think about it and cultivate their interests on it, as long as we develop the curricula and train the teachers in a good way! In this case, we probably be able to have more scientists work on nanotechnology in future!

I completely agree, Yangchao.

Nanotechnology is very multidirectional and therefore, very multidisciplinary in its applications that no single basic science can work on its own. And it is very true and it is a reality that many of our daily activities already involve nanotechnology with or without our awareness.

I believe that to introduce nanotechnology in grade school and high school is not equivalent to the way it is treated in higher education otherwise, the kids as well as their teachers will not be able to grasp the concept. As such, I believe that nanotechnology at their level has to be approached in terms of the basic simple concepts and its existing and popular relevant applications. And today, there are many of those applications which are already part of the lives of humans from small kids to adults. That includes applications in food, paints, sports, cars, clothing and textiles, medicines, bandages, and many many more.

I think we have to be ready to answer the question: when do we begin to address the needs that I previously mentioned above so that the teachers will be ready to introduce nanotechnology in lower education. What steps should be taken, where should we start , how do we fund these steps, and many more logistic questions. Once we are prepared, then maybe we can call on the teachers to volunteer for the workshops that the nanotech people like us are going to put up to train them.

I think so..especially when its used everywhere in day to day life. I think instead of sticking to text books, it should be taught such a way that kids can correlate in-class and hands-on experience to day to day activities, something like making Kaleidoscope with some cardboard and mirrors.

I think its should be good to provide basic key knowledge at high school because this will help to build an interest for grade school as well as in this way the key concepts which provided at high school level will be help the student in grade school class .

Yes, getting the young aware of the technologies that we have in our life time is the best inheritance that we can leave to them. Also, awareness at a young age will probably encourage them to go into nanotechnology to support its growth that, I believe, will benefit various aspects of life, industries, the environment, and many more in the future.

There are changes in the various areas of science, technology, math and engineering. As such, we definitely need to upgrade the awareness of the youth to these rapid changes. I believe that teaching them simplified versions of advances in science and engineering will be good for them in the long run.

Zoraida, according to Your question - first of all strong bases in physics, maths and chemistry should be thought. Without them - teaching nanotechnology is pointless, it is just PR for policymakers, not for future scientists or engineers.

Foundations first! On strong foundations nanotechnology, or anything else can be built then. We can not teach nanotechnology without teaching principles of chemistry, physics and maths first! Otherwise, we will have morons full of PR instead of aware engineers and scientists!

+1 for fundamentals, and I would say that Nanotechnology needs MORE fundamentals. As an examples, in most engineering courses quantum mechanics is given at a pretty basic level, definitely guys need more. Which implies more math, too.

I think materials sciences, chemistry and nanaotechnology should be taught in high school as the fundamental interactions of elementary elements give a deep insight about the materials that enables the researchers ,scientists and engineers to explore and invent diverse materials,components,devices and systems .

In my experience, the "best" nanotechnology has achieved so far is that very different disciplines have come much closer together both in research and in teaching. Consequently, nanotechnology courses are really now very close to the very old fashioned science courses, that do not distinguish between physics, chemistry and biology. Modern nanotechnology course also add engineering, medicine and sometimes even economics. Unfortunately, they also exclude vital aspects of science that are perhaps irrelevant to nanotechnology such as evolution, relativity, astronomy, to name a few. I would therefore prefer to re-introduce interdisciplinary science modules rather than more nanotechnology courses, at school and at university level. Depending on interest, nanotechnology can then come in in the form of practicals, problems, illustrations, etc., but it is really unified science that we should want to teach. There is a good chance here, and some universities are picking this up, for example Leicester in the UK.

According to Mathias, the most important are strong basics and ability of joining of various knowledge from different areas.

Nanotechnology is the technology of the 21st century. It is in the process of revolutionizing almost every single aspect of technology as we know it. It is now being used in sports, automotive, aerospace, agriculture, medicine, food, construction, electronics, solar energy, and many more. The sooner the younger generation gets exposed to it, the more knowledgeable they will be of the uses as well as the potential bad effects of nanotechnology in their lives and their environment.

As more nano-based products are released in the market especially in food, health and medicine, I am more convinced that nanotechnology should be taught as part of chemistry, biology, physics and the rest of the high school sciences. It can be taught in an introductory level that should be easy to absorb by the youth. This way thay can better understand it when they get faced with it as they choose their future career or in their life.

I am excited to share here that I will be handling a special research class for senior high school students focusing on Nanomaterials for Medical Applications this summer. Among the insights I would like to get out of the class is the students level of knowledge before ad after the class and their final reaction to the class at the end of the 5-week course. Professionally, I would like to see them enthusiastic enough about nanotechnology to pursue it in their undergraduate course or honors research.

I finally had the chance of teaching nanotechnology for life sciences research to incoming senior high school students during this summer at the University of Arkansas Upward Bound for Math and Sciences. Their enthusiasm and interest is very encouraging! They are very thankful that they now have first-hand experience in handling quantum dots, iron oxide magnetic nanoparticles, gold NPs, and AgNPs!

I even had the chance to provide a 1 hour lecture to all the students of the Upward Bound for Math and Sciences who were not enrolled in my research class! I was completely surprised by their questions and the amount of interest that the students had after the lecture! They are ready to learn more about the advantages, uses, as well as the disadvantages of nanotechnology! In Arizona, they have the Arizona Nanotechnology Cluster's K-20 Education Links which supports local K-20 education in an outreach program providing grade school, high school and community college with scientist in nanotechnology as lecturers to educate and introduce students to careers in nanotechnology! This is fantastic because more than 2 million workforce will be needed in the nanotechnology area by 2015!

Check this website: http://www.nano.gov/education-training-workforce

 I fully with the views of Dr. Gyorgy Banhegyi, that we should train the students well in basic physics and chemistry and mathematics. While teaching these subjects in the normal classroom we must stretch their imagination into the invisible world. Make them aware on the limits of resolution, and how great scientists could overcome them to a great extent. this will help in producing a new generation, which will begin to think and question and come up with innovative ideas. For these things to happen you need to give them a solid background training.

Straightaway teaching and exposing to present day nano research will not help us in the long time.

K. Sreenivas 

The concepts of the quantum world have been fundamental to the physics and chemistry science curriculum since early last century. They are usually not treated in depth at undergraduate level however. Students at that level are introduced to the concepts of molecules, atoms and even subatomic structure, however. In this context, nanoscience and nanotechnology are not new, remembering also that techniques to visualise at this scale, such as EM were developped as early as the 1930s.  The ability to manipulate structures at this level has evolved significantly siince the 1980s, however, and the  curriculum at all levels should be updated to reflect this, probably in an introductory fashion for undergraduate physics and chemistry.