[Ms.Moser]

This question is aimed at those doing current undergrad chemistry education as well as those working in the field.

I teach HS chemistry and when I teach naming of molecular compounds I have always focused on the prefix system of names (silicon dioxide); mentioning/demonstrating, but spending little time on the stock naming system for molecular compounds (silicon (IV) oxide).

When I was an undergraduate, I never once heard any reference to a molecular compound using the stock system, but that is 20 years in the past (with many profs whose PhD were of a 70's or 80's vintage). Am I out of date? Should I be emphasizing stock over prefix for my students?

Thoughts?

[Arkcon]

It was sain when I was in high school, in 1984, that what you call prefix naming, for example, ferric/ferrous was soon to be completely replaced by what you call stock naming, in this case Fe (II) / Fe (III).  I was supposed to be the very last group to need to know the "old" system.. It hasn't died out completely yet, you will have to mention both.  But it would probably be best to focus on stock naming.

[Ms.Moser]

I do teach (only) stock nomenclature with ionic compounds involving transition metals (for example: iron (I) chloride vs. iron (II) chloride), but the textbook I am using (copyright 2002) references the use of stock naming for molecular compounds using assigned oxidation numbers.

For example:
N2O5- prefix system = dinitrogen pentoxide vs. stock system= nitrogen (V) oxide
NO2- prefix system = nitrogen dioxide vs. stock system= nitrogen (IV) oxide

This is the thing I've never seen in use and wanted to know if I am missing the boat (and ill preparing my students).