G. Tyler Miller, Jr.' Hampden-Sydney College ~ ~ ~ ~ d ~ ~ - sVirginia y d n e y ,
A Four-Year Research Participation Program for a Liberal Arts College
Undergraduate research participation a t liberal arts colleges has been given considerable attention in recent years (1-8). Although some colleges have had a long tradition of participation in research by undergraduates, such programs a t many institutions have only recently become financially feasible. This has occurred primarily as a result of support from the NSF Undergraduate Research Participation Program. Additional stimulus has been provided by the Research Corporation and by starter grants from the ACS Petroleum Research Fund. This paper reports a program which has been carried on a t Hampden-Sydney College for the past five years. We have tried to eliminate some of the weaknesses that are frequently associated with undergraduate research programs. We felt that the traditional honors program at the junior or senior level is often unsatisfactory. Quite often the student does not have sufficient time and experience to develop much independence and research maturity, and he usually graduates a t about the time he begins to make progress. Because of this lack of depth and because he is often, by necessity, forced to work only on short range problems, he frequently gets a false picture of the nature of research. Furthermore, well qualified freshman and sophomore students, seen in increasing numbers, are excluded. Finally, we hoped that a program could be designed that would eliminate the frequent complaint of undergraduate research directors that students are not capable of effective participation during the academic year. In an attempt to avoid these difficulties, we have invited outstanding chemistry or premedical majors to begin participation in an established major research program as early as the middle of their freshman year. This is an investigation of the corrosion behavior of metals using large metal single crystals, an extension of the work of Gwathmey (9) and his associates a t the University of Virginia. Recently, Dr. W. W. Porterfield, another member of our departmental staff, entered the program as a co-director. Experience has shown that this particular research project has flexibility in technique and theory that allows the student to participate with some comprehension and satisfaction early in his academic career. As the participant gains more experience, he recognizes the extreme complexity of this basic study of metal surfaces. Furthermore, because the program is concerned with interactions at a solid-solution interface, the student is exposed to a broad range of experimental techniques and theoretical concepts. 1 Present address: Department of Chemistry, St. Andrews Presbyterian College, Laurinburg, N. C.
368
/
Journal of Chemical Education
A typical participant must learn techniques of metallographic polishing, optical microscopy, electron microscopy, high vacuum evaporation techniques for replication of metal surfaces, Laue X-ray diffraction, photography, spectrophotometry, inorganic synthesis, film thickness measurements using coulometric reduction and microbalance measurements, electronics, metal lathe working, and introductory glassblowing. Theoretical concepts that are normally studied include the oxidation and corrosion of metals, imperfections and dislocations in solids, crystallography, geometric optics, crystal growth, electrochemistry, theories of electrolyte solutions, and reaction kinetics. The freshman chemistry course in which a textbook such as that written by Ander and Sonnessa (10) is used, provides a degree of sophistication in physical chemistry that introduces the student to many of these concepts. Our primary goal is to grant the undergraduate student opportunity for up to three and oue-half years of participation in a program designed to give him maximum independence by his senior year. To accomplish this two students normally work as a team on a particular problem related to the over-all project. This team consists of an advanced student (junior or senior), and a research apprentice (freshman or sophomore). The apprentice normally enters the program a t the middle of his freshman year and usually serves in this capacity, with gradually increasing independence, until the end of his sophomore year. During the apprentice ueriod, the student can master the necessary research ;cchniques :and gain the vonfi~lence and diviplinr uccess:wy for Lighly i~depcnclmtwork iluring hiq junior : a t d senior years as a team leader. Furthermore, the student can discover at an early point in his career whether he has the interest and ability to carry out research. The team leader is given a considerable degree of responsibility for directing, organizing, and evaluating his research as well as for training his apprentice. The help derived from his apprentice enables him to carry out a larger number of experiments. This is particularly useful in increasing the amount of research performed during the academic year. An additional advantage of this scheme results from shifting most of the training responsibility from the professor to the advanced student. Since the professor does not have to train each student in routine techniques, much of his time is saved, and this can be used for his own research or for incorporating a larger number of students into the program. Equally important is the fact that the advanced student is involved in a teaching experience while training his apprentice. The progress toward independence for a typical student is outlined below:
Freshman-Aeadmic Yea-2nd semesterStudent enters the program and begins to learn the basic research techniques. F?exhmawSummer-Normally two outstanding freshmen begin full time participation for ten weeks during the summer. Each participant continues to learn techniques and is usually assigned as an apprentice to an advanced student. As he matures, he is given sn increasing amount of independence. Sophomore-Academic Year-Students participating in the summer program after their freshman year normally work as apprentices with a senior who is finishing his project. Students who did not participate in the summer program continue to learn techniques as apprentices. S o p h o m e - S u m M t u d e n t s working for their second summer normally assume team leadership. Others are assigned a? apprentices. JunioliAcademic Yea-Student usuelly has fully responsibility for a project as a team leader. Junior-SummeAame as junior academic year. Senior-Academic Yeal-Stodent normaUy finishes hi project and writes up his work for publication in the appropriatejournal. He would normally present his results at the annual meeting of the Virginia Academy of Science.
It should be emphasized that this program is not rigid. A student who works better alone may not be assigned an apprentice and a "late bloomer" may enter the program as an apprentice during his sophomore or junior year. Normally, three or four students are selected to enter the project in the middle of their freshman year. It is expected that two of these students will remain in the program through their senior year. Others will drop out, either because of alack of interest or through failure to maintain an acceptable average. They may also transfer to another undergraduate research program directed by other staff members. I n this way the program can provide early training and stimulation for most of the undergraduates who eventually participate in all departmental research programs. During the academic year, the junior or senior participant can receive full academic credit (three hours per semester) for his research work as an honors course. The apprentice receives no credit. He must prove himself in order to he eligible for summer participation and for the privilege of taking honors work during his last two years. Students receive research stipends during the academic year and the summer except for their first semester of participation during the freshman year. All participants are selected by the director on the basis of ability and interest. In order to enter or remain in the program the student is normally expected to maintain a B average, although each case is treated individually. Our experience, as well as that of others, indicates that in some cases a student making high grades is not necessarily a good research participant. An effective method has been developed for identifying potential participants by the middle of their freshman year. The author teaches all freshman chemistry classes and once each semester requires of each student a short term open-ended lab project as part of the normal laboratory work. A pair of students making approximately the same grade are given a short term "research" project. For example, they may be asked to prove which of several chemicals is the best antifreeze, or to study the variables affecting the rate of a particular reaction. Since they are provided only with a statement of the problem, they must use reference books and original articles along with their own imagi-
nations in order to find or devise at least three methods for attacking their problems. One method of attack is then chosen and the students must defend their choice and demonstrate their understanding of the problem in an oral discussion period with astafl member. The necessary apparatus is then built and results are obtained and evaluated. Since this is a stimulating and openended experience for the student, the author finds little difficulty in identifying those students with the interest, imagination, and ability for carrying out independent research. It is also interesting to note that a significant percentage of the most effective participants would not have been identified solely by means of their high school records or CEEB scores. During the summer program, all participants meet with the director and co-director once each week for an intensive research seminar. At this time students summarize the rmults they obtained during the past week and outline their plans for the coming week. The faculty members and the student participants then engage in critical discussion of these results and plans. Since all participants are working on phases of one basic program, they are quite capable of making critical judgments and suggestions about the work of other participants. Following this, all students participate in a discussion of an original article related to the research, which they have studied during the week. During the academic year, students participate in similar meetings about once every two or three weeks, and sometime during the year each participant is required to give a formal seminar on theoretical material related to the over-all project. Considerable stimulus is provided by inviting from one to three scientists working in the same general area of research to visit the program as consultants. Evaluation
It is felt that the strongest feature of the program is the depth of experience gained by the participant. This scientific maturation is particularly noticeable during the student's third summer of participation and during his senior year. At this time the student becomes a research partner who cannot only make significant and often original contributions, but can also frequently show his faculty mentors the folly and irrationality of their ideas. An indication of the depth of experience obtained is also found in the way in which the student selects a graduate school. He concentrates primarily on the nature and quality of the research in specific areas in which he has become interested. For example, the first participant who completed the entire program selected and began his graduate school research within one week after entering graduate school. The program also seems to be successful in helping the student develop a research attitude which can be applied to any area, rather than in orienting him toward a particular branch or subdiscipline within chemistry. Another favorable aspect of the program results from the teaching experience gained by the advanced students while training an apprentice. Also, by providing qualified freshmen and sophomore students with a stimulating and enriching experience, it has been a significant factor in attracting good students. Several disadvantages or limitations of this program Volume 43, Number 7, July 1966
/
369
must also he recognized. One danger lies in the fact that a student may become bored or disinterested while working on a problem over such a long period. This is particularly crucial after the first summer of participation. Initially the student is very enthusiastic, hut by this time his work as an apprentice has become somewhat routine. He wants to do more on his own, hut normally lacks the skill and confidence to make significant progress. I n addition, he has by this time become apprehensive after realizing the enormous complexity of the over-all research problem and being acutely aware of his own lack of knowledge. If the student can he sustained during this period until his second summer of participation, he can then proceed to gain the full benefits of the program. Another disadvantage is that once this kind of program is started, there is a strong pressure to keep it in continuous operation. This results from the two year incubation period needed to bring several students to the advanced level before the apprentice program can be instituted. This means that funds for equipment, stipends, and a reasonable supply of students must be forthcoming each year. The necessity for continuity also means that the faculty member has little opportunity to broaden his horizons by spending asummer away from the campus. This can he alleviated to a great extent by planning a program that will incorporate at least two faculty members. A further limitation in developing such a program lies in the nature of the general problem to he investigated. Ideally, it should he long-range, include a broad range of techniques and theoretical topics, and should allow students to participate with reasonable progress before they have had many advanced courses. The program as designed undoubtedly increases the amount of effective participation during the academic year. However, it is still felt that this is the weakest part of the program. The fragmentation of the student's time prevents any sustained or serious research effort. We are convinced that effective participation during the academic years occurs primarily when research is a part of the student's course load and is not an appendage to the curriculum. We are in the process of trying a different approach to academic year research. It is our thesis that research during the aca, demic year should neither he added to the curriculnm nor even he given primarily in the form of an honors course or senior thesis. Instead, research should form
370 / Journol of Chemical Edumtion
the basis for all laboratory work in the entire chemistry curriculum from the freshman through the senior year. The department has been instituting such a "researchoriented" curriculum for the past four years. In summary, it is felt that the program described in this paper gives the participants a depth of research experience rarely found a t the undergraduate level, and that such a program can add significant vitality to the over-all departmental program. In order to meet the research needs of a variety of diierent student types and interests, i t may he desirable for a department to offer at least one additional program in which students can work on short-range problems that may require only one summer of participation. Acknowledgment
The author is deeply indebted to Dr. Willianl W. Porteriield who recently joined the program as a coinvestigator and t~ the many students who have contributed to the success of the program. Particular thanks go to C. E. Guthrow, Jr., R. G. McAllister, Jr., and R. W. Topham, who, as the original student participants, made significant contributions to'the development of the program. This program was supported by an initial grant from the Research Corporation and Hampden-Sydney College and by subsequent grants from Sigma Xi, the National Science Foundation Undergraduate Science Education Program, and PHS Research grants DE-01893-01 and DE-01893-02, National Institute of Dental Research, Public Health Service. Literoture Cited (1) FROMM, F. J., J. CHEM.EDUC.,33, 347 (1965). (2) "Research and Teaohing in the Liberal Arts College,'' a report of the Wooster Conference, 1959. Available from Harry F. Lewis, Institute of Paper Chemistry, Appleton, Wis., or John D. Reinheimer, College of Wooster, Wooster, Ohio. J. D., J. CHEM.EDUC.,37,121 (1960). (3) DANFORTH, (4) WILLEFORD, B. R.,JR.,J. CHEM. EDUC.,39,110 (1962). ( 5 ) PARRY, R. W., J. &EM. EDUC.,39,114 (1962). (6) GUENTHER, W. B., J. CHEM.EDUC.,39,118 (1962). (7) BARBER,S. F., BRESCIA, F.,AND KREMEH, C. B., J. CHEM. EDUC.,39,121 (1962). E. W., J. CHEM.EDUC.,41,668 (1964). (8) PHELAN, A. T., AND LAWLESS,K. R., "The Surface (9) GWATHMEY, Chemistry of Metals and Semiconductors," (Edilor: GATOS,H. C.), John Wiley & Sans, Inc., New Yark, 1960, p. 483. A. J., "Principles oi Chemistry," (10) ANDER, P., AND SONNESSA, The Macmillan Ca., New York, 1965.
