Kids Chemistry Sets

Thanks to You the Spot.Us Experiment Worked

Aren’t experiments cool? Well, OK, not always. Sometimes the chemistry set blows up, but most of the time you learn something at least.

We just finished up an experiment here at JJIE, and thanks to you it was successful.

Bill Sanders, a former features writer at the Atlanta Journal Constitution brought us a story idea a few weeks ago about a program designed to warn kids about the dangers of activities that could lead to brain and neck injuries. It was an interesting proposal, but the nature of newsrooms these days – especially one as small as the JJIE’s – is that we don’t always have the money to pay for it.

That’s where Spot.Us came in. This is a website where organizations such as JJIE as well as individuals can go to get stories funded. The funders are other organizations and members of the public. The Spot.Us site also allows the public to suggest stories and participate with journalists on projects. Check it out if you haven’t already.

Sanders’ story appears on our page today. And, as promised, it is compelling.

And thanks to all of you who contributed, the rest of the public can read it.

Cyanide, Uranium, and Ammonium Nitrate: When Kids Really Had ...

Learning to work with things that might go boom was at one time part of both the education and practice of chemistry. hell, edison was injured in his own garage lab as a teenager due to an unexpected explosion. now everybody seems to think all you need to do is simulate reasction on a computer. maybe so – chemistry is something of a dead science today, a language necessary to work in newer technologies. but there’s risk anytime you work with powerful materials, and with the us running short on such things maybe it’s okay this way.

It’s a bit ridiculous to have chemical free chemistry sets! American Science & Surplus is a Very Good Thing, indeed, but I hope that toy and game innovators keep trying – we have a space program to revitalize and many strides in the sciences and medicine to push forward – we need kids who aren’t afraid of things blowing up or going wrong, which is what fiddling with science teaches you…

When I was a kid, I had the visible man, and I was NEVER able to put it back together properly. Maybe it was missing parts? It was a hand-me-down after all. My son fell in love with the Uncle Milty’s Ant Farm. We had those ants for YEARS! They were so cool. They had little chambers they buried their dead, separate chambers for various kinds of food, and separate sleeping chambers. I liked it as much as my son! Now he is grown, but you gave me a great idea for my grandson! Thanks!

Great post! I think part of the the demise of Chemistry Kits has come with the idea that the kit has to “make” something. Make Soap! Make Bouncy Balls! Make Perfume! Make Slime! These kits are the equivalent of a cake mix — several ingredients, just add water, ta daa! It’s slime! I’ve owned these kits and the “hours of fun” usually translates to about 20 minutes of following a recipe and a bowl of slime that sits in the fridge until I throw it away. Now look at the old kits: The message is “Experiment” – In other words, here are a bunch of chemicals and information about their properties, now go see what you can make. That “stinky caustic mess” was part of the learning. Today if you get a stinky caustic mess, you did it wrong. You clearly didn’t follow instructions. You messed up. How does that encourage experimentation and a love of chemistry?

@Timothy Wade: Looks like you’re doing it right.

Illustrated guide to home chemistry experiments, all lab, no lecture

Scaring the Kids

The Lionel Legend, An American Icon

New Scientist

Boys' Life