B. R. Siebring and M. E. Schoff University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Milwaukee, W~sconsin53201
I
I
Doctoral Origins of Eminent Chemists
I n 1961 the first-named writer of this in which article published a study in THIS JOURNAL institutions were compared according to the doctoral origins of eminent chemists.' This study defined eminent chemists as Nobel prize winners, members of the chemistry division of the National Academy of Science, 1948-60: persons listed as distinguished chemists in the first e d ~ t ~ of o n"Leaders in American Science," and winners of a recognized American award for accomplishment in chemistry. I n this present paper, the 1961 study is revised, expanded, and brought up-todate. The definition of an eminent chemist has been broadended to include, first, the biochemistry members of the Nationa! Academy of Science of the last decade and, second, American scientists whose biographies appear in "McGraw-Hill Modern Men of Science."2 The editors of this hook describe in the preface the scientists whose biographies appear in the volume as "selected from among the recipients of many of the world's major prizes in science marded since 1940." The third change in the definition of eminent chemists for the purpose of the present study involved the list of a~vardsto he used as a criterion for selection. These changes were made because of modifications of awards and the number of new awards ~vhichhave been offered in the last decade. We have included m the present study all awards sponsored by the American Chemical Society, most American Chemical Society Division awards, American Chemical Society Section awards not limited to a given state or small geographical region, and eight awards not associated with the American Chemical Society The 1961 investigation listed the doctoral origins of 456 eminent chemists who received their recognit;on through 1960. This paper has included eminent chemists who received their awards through 1969 and those whose awards were announced for 1970. As a result, 318 eminent chemists were added to the list, to make a total of 774. I n both investigations, information as to where individuals received their doctorates was obtained primarily from the "American Men of Science" and biographies appearing in Chemical and Engineering News. The distribution for the leading doctoral sources of the 774 eminent chemists is listed in Table 1. This list is very similar to the one listing the doctoral origins of the 456 eminent chemists of the 1961 study. The top ten institutions remained the same, although there mere minor shifts in rank throughout the list. Eight institutions provided the doctoral training for more
' SIEBRING, B. R., J. CHEM.EDUC.,38, 630 (1961).
Modern Men of Science." l C ~ ~ W.~ H.. s ~'tI\I~Graw-Hill .
h~e~raw- ill Book company, New York, 1966. 72
/
Journal o f Chemical Education
Table 1.
Doctoral Origins of 774 Eminent Chemists
Institution
Number
Cumulative V!
Harvard Columbia. Chicago Illinois California (all campuses) Wisconsin Princeton California Teeh.
Yale - --
Cornell Johns Hopkins Mass. Inst. Teeh. Ohio State Michigan Minnesota Iowa State Stanford Pennsylvania Pennsylvania State Brown 2 universities 2 universities 1 university 3 universities 7 universities 9 universities 6 universities 14 universities Table 2. Contributions by Various Groups of Institutions as Sources of Doctoral Trainina of 774 Eminent Chemists
Grou~
Number
0/,
Regional Northeast West North Central South Control Public Private Big Three Ivy League Big Ten A.C.E. Too Ten
than half of the eminent chemists. Twenty institutions provided the doctoral training for 640 eminent chemists, or82.7%. In order to ascertain shifts in doctoral training that had taken nlace with time, the doctoral orirrins of eminent chemists were listed by decade (from t h i teens through the fifties) in which the doctorate was obtained. Harvard jumped from 7th position in the thirties t o 2nd position in the forties and to 1st position in the fifties. California Institute of Technology went from 11th position in the forties to 2nd in the fifties. Illinois fluctuated between 2nd, 3rd, rand 4th positions throughout the five decades. California was 1st in the forties and 2nd in the fifties. Columbia steadily
declined from rank one in the teens to a position below the top ten in the fifties. Harvard, California, Illinois, Wisconsin, and Chicago were consistently among the top ten for all five decades. The data presented in Table 2 show the contributions made by various groups of institutions as sources of doctoral training of eminent chemists. Again the data were broken down to ascertain any trends during- the time covered. The contribution of the Western states increased for each decade from 4.1% in the teens to 18.4% in the fifties. The Northeast& states dropped from 53.3% in the teens to 34.2% in the thirties and then climbed back to near 40% in the forties and fifties. The North Central states have shown a gradual but consistent decline from approximately 42% in the teens to 34% in the fifties. The South has gradually increased its proportion from 4% in the teens to over 9% in the fifties. No deacernible trends were evident for the Big Three, Ivy League, and Big Ten groups. I n 1966 the American Council on Education published an evaluation of graduate e d u ~ a t i o n . ~Essentially, this evaluation was a compilation of the opinions of experts in various academic disciplines on the quality of graduate faculties and the effectiveness of graduate programs. The institutions ranked as the top ten by A.C.E. provided the doctoral education for 53Y0 of the eminent chemists included in the present study. This figure did not fluctuate appreciably by decade. When the National Academy members were considered as a group by themselves, the doctoral training was considerably more concentrated in the top ten institutions than when the complete group of eminent chemists was considered. The leading doctoral sources of members of the National Academy of Science are listed in Table 3. Five institutions werc the doctoral sources for better than 50%, and nine institutions accounted for the doctoral training of almost 75% of the chemistry or biochemistry academy members. When the institutions were ranked as doctoral sources of academy members by decade, considerable shifting among the ranks took place. For example, Harvard ranked one in the fifties after sharing first place with California in the forties; Wisconsin was number one in the thirties; and California was number one in the twenties and, also, along with Harvard, in the forties. Table 3. Doctoral Origins of 197 Chemistry or Biochemistry Members of the National Academy of Sciences 1948-69
Institution
Number
Cumulative
33 24 22 16 14 11 10 10
16.8 28.9 40.1 48.2
%
Harvard
California Columbia California Tech. Wisconsin Chicago Illinois Mass. Inst. Tech. Princeton Yale Cornell Stanford Michigan Minnesota Pennsylvania Ohio State 4 institutions 11 institutions
Institution Princeton California Tech. Buffalo Brown California (all campuses) Johns Hopkins Chieam ~olu
