C&EN [feature DR. ARTHUR F. SCOTT, Reed College, Portland, Ore.
Big Schools, Little Schools, And the Chemistry Student The characteristics of universities and colleges— their size, faculty, facilities, affluence, Ph.D· productivity, and geographical location—have a marked effect on the extent to which a student is motivated to seek a career in chemistry in particular or in science in general. In the past several years academic scientists have complained that small colleges are no longer equal partners with universities on the educational team. Perhaps federal support of a college-administrered faculty grant program could restore the balance
Previous articles in this series have discussed chemical education mainly in terms of the numbers of individuals involved. In this article we shall consider those characteristics of colleges that may affect a student's interest in science (chemistry). These considerations can be only qualitative in nature; yet they provide some important insights into the mechanism of the educational process at the college level. Two different paths have been followed in attempts to establish those characteristics of colleges which might be important in developing scientists (chemists). One has been to assume that Ph.D. productivity of an undergraduate college is an index of important characteristics of the college and then to seek to identify those characteristics by studying baccalaureate origins of Ph.D. candidates. The second path has been to look for effects on the direction of students' interests that might be attributable to an institution's financial resources—its affluence. Studies Based on Baccalaureate Origins of Ph.D.'s The matter of Ph.D. productivity first became of interest during World War II. Following the war, Knapp and Goodrich, in their now classical
96
C&EN
JUNE
14, 1965
Part 4 Education and Training Of Chemists in the U.S. study, showed that certain small liberal arts colleges were outstanding in the percentage of their graduates who went to graduate school and ultimately received Ph.D. degrees. Knapp and Goodrich accounted for the effectiveness of these small colleges in terms of college characteristics such as type of control, level of training of the faculty, geographical region, laboratory facilities, and the like. In recent years, the research group of the National Merit Scholarship Corp. (NMSC) has investigated Ph.D. productivity from the standpoint of the students' academic characteristics and qualifications. It would take us too far afield to review the methods of these extremely interesting studies. However, some of the conclusions of NMSC are relevant to this discussion and are as follows: • "It was found that these differences in output of Ph.D/s could be attributed partially to the characteristics of the entering students, rather than wholly to the effects of the institutions themselves. Two recent studies have, in fact, shown that many of the institutions which were classified previously as highly productive turn out to be the most 'underproductive' when selected characteristics of their student inputs are controlled." • "The effects of different college characteristics on the student's motivation to pursue a career in science were examined in a four-year longitudinal study of high-aptitude students attending 82 undergraduate institutions. The male student's motivation to pursue a career in science appeared to be positively influenced by attendance at a technological institution or a coeducational liberal arts college and to be negatively influenced by attendance at one of the men's colleges in the Northeast. The female student's motivation to pursue a career in science appeared to be negatively affected by the affluence of the institution attended. The student's decision to pursue a career in science at graduation from college appeared to be much
This is part 4, the concluding article in the four-part series on the century-long evolution in educating and training chemists in the U.S. C&EN published part 1 on March 29, part 2 on April 26, and part 3 on May 17. The whole series can be obtained as a single reprint. See page 108.
more dependent on his characteristics as an entering freshman than on the characteristics of the college he attended." Another pertinent attempt to identify college characteristics that might influence a student to pursue a career in science was the Wooster Conference (1959). Specifically, the Wooster Conference undertook to test the hypothesis that research activity in the chemistry department of a small college is important in stimulating students to pursue their studies in graduate school. Because the Wooster Conference dealt exclusively with the education of chemists, I shall summarize, in some detail, its procedures and findings. Prior to the conference, questionnaires were sent to the chemistry departments of approximately 300 small colleges. The questionnaires were set up to provide answers to two questions of primary importance: In what respects do the very productive colleges differ from the less productive? and, What part does research play in that difference? Productivity classifications are based on the number of Ph.D/s from the colleges for the 20-year period, 1936-56. The four classes are as follows: • Very productive colleges yielded 30 or more Ph.D's. • Productive colleges yielded from 15 to 30 Ph.D/s • Borderline colleges yielded five to 15 Ph.D/s. • Unproductive colleges yielded four or less Ph.D/s. Other questions were directed to what might be called ways-and-means factors, such as facilities and equip-
ment, professional activities, support for research, and obstacles to research. Data gathered from these questionnaires, from college catalogs, and from representatives of colleges having high productivity were evaluated at the conference by the 32 participating faculty members from small colleges. The conclusions reached are well stated in the following quotation from the abstract of the report on the conference: "Very productive colleges have the following advantages: better prepared and larger chemistry faculties, lower contact hours per teacher, more major students, larger chemistry libraries with better coverage in periodicals and reference books and with their libraries located in the chemistry (science) building, more departmental services such as departmental secretaries, and full-time stock room keepers. The majority of the faculty and their better-advanced students are carrying on research and in the case of the students, on problems developing from the research of the faculty. Research funds appear to be readily available in the very productive colleges, either from the colleges themselves or from the various foundations; these 30 colleges receive almost 60% of the funds reported by the 300 colleges. Their faculties do much more publishing of original research and of books. These colleges have a more favorable atmosphere for research, for research is widely carried on by all departments. "Almost all responding to the questionnaires feel that research improves teaching. All the participants agreed that the personal contacts developed between faculty and students in research results in an interest in chemistry and a desire for graduate work. This is supported by the many letters received from recent graduates of participating colleges. Truly, research and productivity seem to go hand in hand." There can be little doubt that the Wooster Conference admirably described the difference between the JUNE
14,
196 5 C & E N
97
productive and nonproductive college. As the discussion in the following section will suggest, there is some question whether research is a primary cause of this difference or whether it is a consequence of some other, more basic factor. The Affluence
Factor
First, though, let us consider a study by Astin and Holland of the NMSG research group, called "The Distribution of 'Wealth' in Higher Education." (Later, I shall extend some of the ideas of this study to cover the entire group of both public and privately endowed institutions.) As the sample for their study, Astin and Holland used 340 institutions which, in the fall of 1959, enrolled 15 or more freshmen from a 10% national sample of high school students scoring above the 64th percentile on the National Merit Scholarship Qualifying Test (NMSQT). As its major function, NMSC tests about 800,000 high school seniors for the purpose of identifying talent. The testing begins with the NMSQT, a three-hour test of educational development. As a result of this test approximately 15,000 students are first selected as semifinalists, and of this group about 1500 are eventually designated as Merit Scholars. Each Merit Scholar receives a four-year award scaled to need. These awards are provided by NMSC and about 150 sponsors. Among the sponsors are business concerns, labor unions, and colleges. In 1962, 1041 stipend-bearing Merit Scholarships were awarded, the average award being $845 a year. Astin and Holland noted that although these 340 colleges are probably not representative of all fouryear degree-granting institutions, they do account for approximately 69% of the total enrollment in such institutions. Due to a lack of necessary data, the initial sample of 340 institutions was reduced to 309 in the actual study. The sample of 309 institutions was divided into two groups, according to the source of funds, as follows: 194 private institutions and 115 public institutions. As representative indexes of the institutions' financial resources, Astin and Holland chose endowment per student for the private institutions and budget per student (educational and general income per student) for the public institutions. The data used 98
C&EN
JUNE
14,
1965
in calculating the endowment-per-student or budget-per-student figure for an institution were derived from the Seventh Edition (1956) of "American Universities and Colleges." In their study, Astin and Holland subdivided both the private and public groups of institutions, selecting from each group the 30 institutions having the greatest financial resources and the 30 institutions having the least financial resources. To ascertain the possible effect of financial resources on the characteristics of a college, the NMSC investigators compared the high and low endowmentper-student subgroups of private institutions and the high and low budgetper-student subgroups of the public institutions. In their comparison, Astin and Holland found some striking differences, which are summarized as follows: • Faculty—On the average, 65% of the faculty in high-endowment private institutions hold doctoral degrees, compared with only 36% at the lowendowment institutions. Among the low-endowment institutions, the highest per cent of doctorates at any given institution is 57% (26 of the 30 highs have a larger percentage). • Students—Institutions with highendowment funds enroll students of greater ability than do low-endowment institutions. For every Merit Scholar at a low-endowment institution, there are 43 at a high-endowment institution. No Merit Scholars at all were enrolled at 11 of the 30 lowendowment institutions, • Financial resources—The highs have available more than five times as many scholarship dollars per student as the lows and spend four times as much per student for educational and general purposes. Income from gifts, research grants, and services favors the high-endowment institutions by better than 10 to 1, but paradoxically, tuition fees of high-endowment institutions are about 50% higher than those of lôw-endowment institutions. Furthermore, the gap in financial resources between the highs and the lows is steadily widening. Income from contract research and services, for example, which on a per-student basis favored the highs by 10 to 1 in 1956, now favors them by 43 to 1. As Astin and Holland point out, the most heavily endowed private institutions have a near monopoly of student, faculty, and financial wealth, support-
Among Private Institutions . . . %\
ing the concept that these factors go hand in hand. The NMSC investigators were troubled by the trends, revealed in their study, which uniformly favor the high-endowment institutions. Concerning this, they offered the following comment: "It is very likely that some of the more wealthy institutions have reached a point of diminishing returns; that is, that further saturation with financial, student, and faculty 'wealth' can have no appreciable effect on the quality of education offered. Conversely it is unlikely that 'impoverished* institutions will be able
Public Institutio As Well
Figures (1962-63) are for private, ACS-approved institutions
15-
with enrollments of: CO
c: ο
Less than 2000 • I 2000-4000
H 10 ο λ α) -Ω
•
4000-10,000
β
Greater than 10,000
Ι 5 ΕΙ
200400 Budget per student (dollars) Note. Seventeen schools have a budget per student of more than $3000.
to offer a higher quality of education or to encourage achievement unless there are dramatic changes in their student talent supplies and other re sources. It is highly debatable that these great disparities in institutional resources make for a healthy situation. ,, Astin and Holland also compared high-budget and low-budget public institutions. They found the discrep ancies between these two groups to be the same as with the two similar groups of private institutions, except for one point: In the public institu
tions, the percentage of students at low-budget colleges who aspire to doctoral degrees is slightly higher than that at high-budget colleges. Having found close interrelation ships between financial resources, stu dent quality, and Ph.D. output, Astin and Holland undertook to re-examine the conclusions of the Wooster Con ference. Among other things this conference had established that much more money was available to the very productive institutions than to the un productive institutions. These differ ences in resources were interpreted as
accounting, at least partially, for the differences in productivity. Astin and Holland's study, on the other hand, seems to show that the very produc tive Wooster Conference colleges, since they have greater financial re sources, enroll higher-caliber students than the unproductive colleges. The Wooster Conference report concluded that the research money available to very productive departments was in the ratio of 27 to 1, relative to the amount available to unproductive de partments. The N M S C study points out this ratio becomes 7 to 1 on a per-
Figures (1962-63) are for public, ACS-approved institutions with enrollments of:
10
Less than 2000 2000-4000 4000 10,000
Z3
Greater than 10,000
Ξ 6
• 200400
I • I
1800140016002000 1800 1600 Budget per student (dollars)
Note. Four schools have a budget per student of more than $3000.
JUNE
14, 196 5 C & E N
99
Work Profiles of University And College Instructors Differ Markedly Activity
University
Colleagues in department
More than 10
2 to 4
Total teaching load (contact hours weekly)
About six. (Time devoted to research is counted as another part of "load.'*)
About 14
Courses taught
Undergraduate, or graduate, or both
Only undergraduate
Size and nature of class
Fairly large and formal
Lower division classes fairly large and and formal; upper division classes smaller and likely to be informal
Time given to uninspiring aspects of undergraduate teaching—such as paper grading, preparation for laboratory classes, and the like
Little or none
Part of job
Contact with individual undergraduates
Little because of lack of time
Accepted as part of responsibility as teacher
Research
All possible time outside of classroom allotted to research which is regarded as a major activity
If any, usually takes form of watching over undergraduate project
Support for research projects
Available, as a general rule
Rare
Hidden demands on time
(1) Supervision of graduate students (2) Extensive reading on topics related to research and graduate courses (3) Preparation of papers for publication, research proposals, research reports, and the like (4) Attendance at student seminars, lectures by outside visitors, and the like (5) Attend meetings, referee papers and research proposals
(1) Students (2) Supervision of individual student projects (3) Reading on topics related to courses (4) College duties, particularly committee assignments, unrelated to chemistry or teaching.
Travel to ACS and other meetings
Funds generally available grants
Not common because of lack of funds
Responsibility for management of storeroom, laboratory equipment, and the like, all in addition to the teaching load
None
chemistry-student basis and 10 to 1 on a per-chemistry-facuity-member basis. To test their hypothesis, the NMSC groups made a plot comparing the NMSQT scores of students enrolled in the very productive and unproductive Wooster Conference colleges. As Astin and Holland anticipated, the test scores of students entering very productive colleges tend to be higher than 100
C&EN
JUNE
14,
1965
College Instructor
Instructor
in
research
the scores of students enrolling at unproductive colleges. Of particular note is the dearth of students in the highest aptitude intervals who attend unproductive colleges. This fact is further reflected in the 1959 enrollments of Merit Scholars which, on a per-student basis, favor the very productive Wooster Conference colleges by a ratio of 25 to 1.
Inevitable part of job for one or more members of staff
Up to this point the pieces of information and surmises seem to fit together: The greater the resources of a college, the better the quality of its faculty and students is likely to be. The parallelism of financial resources and quality of faculty offers a plausible explanation of the variation of research activity with financial resources; and the parallelism of finan-
cial resources and quality of students accounts for the greater Ph.D. pro ductivity of these schools with the greater financial resources. In the background, however, is the fact that a student of high ability finds his own level, regardless of the financial re sources of the college he attends, al though attendance at a coeducational college is likely to strengthen his mo tivation to be a scientist. There is also nothing that accounts for the fact that high-quality stu dents today tend to go to schools that have the greater financial resources. I suspect that this was not so before World War II. In fact, if one places Knapp and Goodrich's findings (based on prewar experience) into the pic ture, he would have to assume that in the 1920's and 1930's the better stu dents did not have the same tend ency to enroll in the wealthier schools that they have today. I propose now to extend Astin and Holland's scheme of analysis to gather some information concerning the fi nancial characteristics of schools which award bachelor's degrees in chemistry. As a first test, we can compare the number of schools on the Committee on Professional Training (CPT) approved list which appear in Astin and Holland's high and low lists of schools. The results are summa rized as follows: Number of Schools on ACS Approved List
Private institutions 30 H ighest-endowment schools
30
30 Lowest-endowment schools
26
Public institutions 30 Highest-budget schools 30 Lowest-budget schools
28 12
It is quite surprising that the ACSapproved schools dominate both the high and low groups of private insti tutions, and also the high group of public institutions. The compara tively few ACS-approved schools in the low list of public institutions may be related to the fact that this particu lar list includes so many small munic ipal universities or colleges that have no ambition, at least at this time, to of fer approved programs in chemistry. This surprise outcome, in particular the appearance of ACS-approved schools in the lists of lows, raises some questions: Does the chance to secure ACS approval enable a department to
raise its own wealth relative to that of the college as a whole and thereby in validate the high-low classification scheme when applied to chemistry de partments? or, Is ACS approval based on factors quite outside those which seem to be involved in the wealth pic ture of colleges we have been sketch ing? Whatever the answers to these questions, I thought it important to ex amine further the financial resources factor of ACS-approved schools. With this objective in mind I have calculated the budget per student for each school, private and public, that offers a baccalaureate in chemistry, using information available in a recent (Ninth Edition-1964) of "American Universities and Colleges." The req uisite items of information are the in come for educational and general pur poses, and the total enrollment figure. The income factor includes faculty salaries, administrative expenses, and the like, but does not include income for student aid, income from research contracts, or income for capital pur poses. The total enrollment figure in cludes students at the graduate as well as the undergraduate level. The budget-per-student figures are for the academic year 1962-63; quite likely, the figures for private and public insti tutions are comparable. Although the necessary data for a few institutions are not given in the Ninth Edition, there is no reason to believe that the lack of budget-per-student figures for these institutions has any significant effect on the over-all picture pre sented by the other institutions. The private and public institutions have one feature in common: the very considerable range in funds re quired and available for educational activities on a per-student basis. The nature of this variation can be made clearer by considering the median budget-per-student operating costs for the different types of institutions. In the following table I give the range of budget-per-student figures within which the median value falls: School Group
Private Institutions
A Β C
$1,400-1,600 800-1,000 800-1,000
Public Institutions
$1,200-1,400 800-1,000 600-800
Undergraduate institutions which offer majors in chemistry are classified in the following three groups: A—Those institutions on the CPT approved list. • B—Those institutions not on the ap
proved list that returned the CPT questionnaire. C—Those institutions not on the ap proved list that did not return the CPT questionnaire. Because the Β and C schools are mostly undergraduate institutions, the median figures given for them can be compared fairly. The fact, therefore, that the median values of both public and private Β and C schools are in very close agreement is of some sig nificance. The budget-per-student figures of the A group of schools can not be compared fairly to those of the Β and C groups because many of the A schools are universities which offer graduate as well as undergraduate programs. Because the A institutions have gained a place on CPT's approved list, I thought I should examine the fine structure of the financial factor for this particular group of schools. The financial data pertaining to the A schools is summarized in the following table: Private Institutions Without Ph.D. Program
Enrollment
With Ph.D. Program
Lessthan 2,000 $1,600-1,800 $2,600-2,800 2,000-4,000 1,000-1,200 1,800-2,000 4,000-10,000 800-1,000 1,400-1,600 More than 10,000 800-1,000 1,200-1,400 Public Institutions Enrollment
Without Ph.D. Program
With Ph.D. Program
Less than 2,000 $1,200-1,400 $1,600-1,800 2,000-4,000 1,000-1,200 1,400-1,600 4,000-10,000 600-800 1,600-1,800 More than 10,000 600-800 1,600-1,800 Because of the small size of the sam ples involved in the table, the values given for the different medians are open to some question. Yet, the trends which show up in the table are probably significant. First, for the large A institutions, both public and private, without graduate programs in chemistry, the median budget-per-stu dent figures are essentially the same as those for Β and C schools. This similarity leads to the generalization that $800 per student is a base-line figure for undergraduate education. Second, for both public and private institutions, the operating cost per stu dent increases with decreasing size of institution. This size effect is more pronounced with private than with public institutions. Probably, it is no surprise that on a per-student basis the operating cost JUNE
14, 1 9 6 5
G &E Ν
101
of an institution which offers rather expensive graduate programs is greater than that of an institution which offers only undergraduate instruction. In judging the difference between the median values of these two types of schools, one should bear in mind that the median figures for schools with Ph.D. programs are not the operating costs of the graduate programs alone. Rather, these median figures are the average operating costs of graduate programs and undergraduate programs lumped together. The median operating cost per student of the graduate part of universities could be three to five times the median budget per student for the corresponding group of A schools without Ph.D. programs. Analysis of the budget-per-student data leads to the question: What is the cost of graduate education relative to that of undergraduate education? An answer to this question is provided in the CPT-Ph.D. statement that summarizes the committee's efforts to estimate the operating costs of a chemistry department which is involved in a graduate program: "To illustrate how these numbers add up, the committee has obtained budget information from several universities operating small but well-regarded graduate schools. At present, it appears that the total cost (exclusive of university overhead) of operating a department with a staff of 15 to 20 and a graduate enrollment of 55 to 75 at a university with an undergraduate enrollment of 2000 to 4000 runs from $600,000 to $1 million a year. Of this, $300,000 to $400,000 comes directly from university funds and the balance from outside grants." Per-student operating expense of the chemistry department alone averaged over the total enrollment of the institution is $250 to $300. This average is about one fifth of the median budget per student of A institutions of corresponding size that do not have Ph.D. programs. Small College
Problem
One cannot work over the material which has gone into the articles in this series without wondering about a number of features of our system for educating chemists, and speculating on ways to improve it. This final section is devoted to questioning and commenting mainly' on what is known as the small college problem. A historical fact of importance to 102
C&EN
JUNE
14, 196 5
our discussion is that undergraduate science instruction in colleges and the university idea were introduced in America almost simultaneously, in reaction, possibly, to the increasing complexity of western civilization. Accordingly, it is fair to say that from the beginning we have had a dual system for training scientists. In the university system the instructor divides his activities between undergraduate instruction and graduate research and instruction. In the college system the instructor has only a single interest and responsibility—undergraduate instruction. The concurrent histories of these two systems can be divided roughly into three major periods: 1860 to 1900; 1900 to World War II; World War II to present. During the first period (1860 to 1900), most colleges introduced science instruction in their undergraduate programs. But only a very few of these colleges also introduced a program of graduate study, a step which transformed them into universities. By 1900, the educational system was beginning to assume the general pattern that we recognize today. The second period (1900 to World War II) was a period in which this pattern was consolidated and strengthened. The nature of this change stands out clearly in the following paragraph from Abraham Flexner's "Autobiography," published in 1940: "Higher education in the United State at the turn of the twentieth century was almost primitive. Its needs were relatively simple. There was only one university, the Johns Hopkins, which had had from the beginning a clear perception of its function in the field at that time covered by the universities in Germany, though distinguished individual scholars—men like Benjamin Peirce and William James at Cambridge and Willard Gibbs at New Haven—had won brilliant distinction. Harvard, Yale, Columbia, and Chicago, as well as the strongest of the state universities, had not only been stimulated by its example but had been furnished with recruits who were gradually developing university education. Colleges and universities were, compared with their present endowments, all poor. Mr. Gates had at first a vision of one hundred colleges scattered between the Atlantic and Pacific seaboards, each possessing an endowment of a million dollars—an almost fantastic dream
when viewed from the standpoint of actual conditions in the early 1900's. "These weak colleges, often denominational in management and control, have in the last 50 years undergone a remarkable development. They have come to see that an endowment of a million dollars is trivial. Many of them have shed their denominational connections, and those that remain under some sort of denominational support have become broader in spirit
Figures (1962-63) are for all (Groups A, B, and C) private institutions. G r O U p A i n s t i t u t i o n s - O n ACS list of approved schools S ^ . ' 1 : J G r O U p Β i n s t i t u t i o n s —Not on ACS approved list, but returned CPT questionnaire G r o u p C i n s t i t u t i o n s - N o t on ACS approved list, and did not return CPT questionnaire
20O-
400-
600-
400
600
800
8001000
10001200
12001400
14001600
16001800
18002000
20002200
22002400
24002600
26002800
28003000
Budget per student (dollars) Note. Eleven Group A institutions have a budget per student of more than $3000.
and far more tolerant. Denominationalism is thus in a fair way to fade out of American institutions in the wake of increased resources and in creased intelligence, though the inter est of religious denominations in the institutions they founded still contin ues. An outstanding example is Swarthmore, a small college, founded by and for the Quakers, and today one of the most liberal institutions in the land. The Quakers approximate 20%
of its enrollment; the rest are a miscel laneous group." In most respects, the evolutionary process of the first half of this century has continued to the present. Some of the colleges that would have been classified as C colleges (had our clas sification existed) have undergone changes that have put them in the Β group. Some of what would have been Β colleges have sought and gained approval of CPT and, hence,
have become A colleges. And some of the A colleges, in accordance with tradition, have introduced graduate instruction and, by so doing, have given up the college system of instruc tion for undergraduates in favor of the university system. There is some indication that the evolutionary process has speeded up. Thus, the Committee on Professional Training has found it worrisome that "since 1957, there has been a marked
^Λν,?^^Υ!^^^^^
Figures (1962-63) are for all (Groups A, B, and C) public institutions
35 -
ι
en
G r O U p Β I n s t i t u t i o n s — N o t on ACS approved list, but returned CPT questionnaire
1
G r O U p C Institutions—Not on ACS approved list, and did not return CPT questionnaire
ο
institutions
E I I Ë I G r O U p A I n S t i t u t i o n S - O n ACS list of approved schools
30 -
Ο
Γ"
* 15
1 10— _ ...
5 η ». υ *•
•Ν
II II
200-
400-
600-
400
600
800
I?L __ 8001000
I' 10001200
12001400
14001600
16001800
18002000
20002200
22002400
24002600
26002800
28003000
Budget per student (dollars) Note. Six schools have a budget per student of more than $3000. Information is not available on 23 institutions.
JUNE
14 f 1 9 6 5 C & E N
103
Purely undergraduate colleges are important sources of young chemists for graduate schools
proliferation in the number of schools offering or planning to offer degrees in chemistry at the Ph.D. level." Until recently it has generally been taken for granted that the university and college systems were pulling their own weight in the education and training of scientists. In the studies of Ph.D. productivity discussed ear lier, the investigators did not question the equivalence of the basic training and preparation received by students under the two systems—seemingly, the question never arose. In the past few years, however, some academic scientists have complained that the college system is no longer an equal partner in the educational team, and that it threatens to become some thing of a drag. True, this com plaint has not come from chemists. Nevertheless, the issue is likely to arise in chemistry and will then be one of our major concerns. It is for this rea son that I have chosen to discuss the small college problem. Interaction of College Programs As an introduction to this problem, consider the following CPT-Ph.D. statement: "In closing this report, we wish to discuss some of the ways in which graduate and undergraduate programs interact in chemistry departments of the U.S. This is of critical importance in our responsibility and to all of American chemical education. "In principle, the existence of a graduate school can offer many ad vantages to an undergraduate pro gram. These include an up-to-date staff, research-oriented and aware of and able to discuss current problems, the availability of advanced courses, and the use of sophisticated equip ment. On the other hand, the in volvement of this same staff in the graduate program removes them, in large part, from contact with under graduates, diverts their time to other activities, and replaces them with stu dent teaching assistants, particularly in the laboratory. The assistants, 104
C & ΕΝ JUNE
14,
1965
while they may sometimes be enthusi astic, devoted, and well intentioned, all share the common quality of inex perience. "Whether the over-all result is good or bad for the undergraduate is not agreed upon in principle, and cer tainly varies widely from institution to institution. Nevertheless, under graduate programs in both undergrad uate colleges and universities with graduate schools may be said to work. Both send to graduate schools some students who are highly able and very well trained. "If any generalization can be made, it is that while the minimum accom plishment of a chemistry major from a university with a good graduate school is relatively high compared with the average of all those from undergradu ate colleges [italics mine], some col leges consistently produce an excellent product. Of their total student body, a higher proportion choose chemistry as a profession than is the case at any major university. The origin of this discrepancy is a good subject for so ciological debate. But some experi ence with individual schools suggests that majors in large universities are students who have, by and large, made their choice prior to admission. Little successful recruiting occurs in the large, impersonal introductory courses in such institutions. This leads to small numbers, but a generally able, strongly motivated group. In con trast, recruiting of uncommitted stu dents in small colleges with closer stu dent-faculty contact is more success ful, and leads to trouble only if not very able students are then coaxed through too easy programs. "Regardless of the explanation, sta tistics indicate that, of the more than 22,000 Ph.D.'s in chemistry granted from 1920 to 1962, only some 12,000 of the recipients received bachelor's degrees from schools listed in the 1959 Directory of Graduate Research (as shown in "Doctorate Production in United States Universities, 19201962," NAS-NRC Publication 1142, Washington, D.C., 1963). Since,
further, a number of these did not op erate graduate schools over the entire period, it is evident that purely under graduate colleges have provided an important reservoir of candidates for our graduate schools. This makes it particularly important that a school planning a graduate program make certain that this can be accomplished without impairing the quality of its offering to undergraduates, and that it take care that the time and energy of its staff are not too far absorbed into the new endeavor. If it fails to do this, the consequence will be not an expansion of graduate education, but simply a decline in the training and number of candidates for the graduate schools already in existence." Some of the concepts in this quota tion can be interpreted as follows: Purely undergraduate colleges are an important source of young chemists who will want to continue their training in graduate school. However, the average accomplishment of this group of students is relatively low compared with the minimum accomplishment of university students. The basic issue in the small college problem is how to close the gap between the accom plishments of graduates from the two systems—where this gap is real. Reducing the Gap The only means of reducing the gap is to raise the level of training in purely undergraduate colleges. The gap has been interpreted as meaning that colleges have been slipping, and that the gap between the two systems is the fault of the college system. This cause and effect relationship is not necessarily valid. For, as I shall argue, the teaching staffs of university chemistry departments, during the past 10 years or so, have had certain advantages over the chemistry staffs of undergraduate colleges. The gap between the two systems has come about, in part at least, because univer sity staffs have been in a better posi tion to improve and modernize their courses and curriculums than have
the teaching staffs of undergraduate colleges. From the practical standpoint, the small college problem is one of raising the average accomplishments of the graduates of these schools without harming the innate and distinctive character of these schools. As we analyze the problem, it will become clear that the restrictive condition car ried by the problem is what makes the problem special and difficult. For our present puiposes, assume that the quality of undergraduate sci ence instruction is a function of three factors: facilities, course offerings, and instructors. I shall comment on each of these in turn in relation to the kind of changes that can be made to improve the quality of instruction in the small undergraduate college. Facilities—Probably the first items to come to mind are the laboratory and the library. These items are cer tainly weak links in the operations of the chemistry departments of many small colleges. But this need not be. The National Science Foundation has a program (Undergraduate Instruc tional Scientific Equipment) designed to meet such needs by making grants on a matching basis. Proposals to participate in this program are judged in what is really a nationwide compe tition. To have a chance of success, a proposal must show that equipment is being requested as an essential part of a sound program for improv ing a course or the departmental cur riculum. Thus, the key to the allevi ation of deficiencies in facilities is the instructional staff, whose ideas
and objectives determine the content and tone of the proposal.
Course offerings-These
can be
separated into two groups: basic courses and optional courses. Basic courses are common to most chemistry departments. The occurrence of the optional courses usually depends on the special interests of the instructors offering the courses. It must be obvi ous that the ground covered and the richness of the material presented to the students will depend not only on the training and experience of the in structor, but also, in a very important sense, on the effort he has made dur ing his teaching years to keep abreast of developments in chemistry. The number of optional courses in the offerings of a chemistry depart ment of a small college is limited both by the small size of the teaching staff and by the college requirements. If a staff has three members or less, it hardly is likely that any member of the staff will be able to offer an op tional course. However, as the size of a staff increases above four, more and more optional courses can be pre sented. Yet, a student with a major in the department may not be able to avail himself of all of the optional courses because of time limitations imposed by college requirements or by his own personal interests. I make these comments on course offerings in the chemistry department of a small college to show that for this factor, too, the key to a strong department is the teaching staff. Instructional staff—There can be no question that in the day-to-day
teaching operations of a chemistry de partment in a small college, individual teachers are the kingpin of the opera tion. The importance of the role of the teacher, along with the needs for adequate facilities and course offer ings, should leave no doubt that the key to any improvement in total in structional operations of a department and, thereby, in the accomplishments of its graduates is the individual teacher himself. The purpose of this discussion of the teaching situation in a small col lege is to track down the cause of the gap between the accomplishments of a chemistry major from a university and a chemistry major from a college. So it follows that the next step is to examine the opportunities that instruc tors in small colleges have to improve the total instructional program in com parison with corresponding oppor tunities available to instructors in uni versities. Most of the information re garding these two classes of instruc tors has been derived from statements by the Committee on Professional Training. The comparative profiles of univer sity and college chemistry instructors have been presented solely to lay the basis for the following generalizations: • The research activities of a uni versity teacher, together with his grad uate courses, act to keep him in the main current of developments in chemistry, especially in those areas that he regards as his own specialty. The updating of the instructor's un dergraduate course and his contribu tions to the modernization of the de-
Students at "unproductive" colleges (less than five Ph.D.'s)
High-Aptitude Students Favor Schools With Large Graduate Departments
Students at "very productive" colleges (30 or more Ph.D.'s) 25--
20C
15
•s io
δ
5
8894
95_ 101
102108
109115
116122
123129
130136
137144 143 and above
National Merit Scholarship Qualifying Test score
JUNE
14,
196 5 C & E N
105
1963 DIRECTORY OF GRADUATE RESEARCH The newest edition of this unique directory is the sixth to be prepared by the ACS Com mittee on Professional Training.
It covers the 1961-62 and 1962-63 academic years and
provides a useful reference to:
• degrees available • fields of interest and publications of 4,152 faculty members
in 297 departments or divisions of chemistry, biochemistry, and chemical engineering in United States universities offering the Ph.D. degree.
Under each department heading, degrees offered and fields of specialization appear first.
Then faculty members are listed alphabetically with an up-to-date record on their
education . . . general fields of major research interest... subjects of current research . . . publications during the past two years.
With such explicit information you can clearly
determine where your own field of interest is most actively represented.
The table of contents lists universities under the three main groups. index by faculty names.
There is another
A summary table shows for each graduate department of chemis
try the number on the faculty, number of Ph.D.'s in each department, graduate enrollment, and Ph.D. degrees granted in 1961-62 and 1962-63.
It offers a concise comparison by size.
If you counsel students or seek an advanced degree yourself, or if you are interested in knowing the kind of research done in certain academic centers for whatever purpose, then this book will answer your questions and save you time.
655 pages.
Paper bound.
Price: $4.00
Order from : Special Issues Sales, American Chemical Society, 1155 Sixteenth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036
106
C&Ε Ν
partment's curriculum are a natural consequence of his position and contacts in the mainstream of chemical activities. • The instructor in a purely undergraduate college lacks both the time and the stimulus during the academic year to do very much in the way of keeping up with developments in chemistry. His one real opportunity to update himself and to improve his courses is the summer vacation period. If these generalizations are correct, the superiority of undergraduate instruction in universities stems from the opportunities which accrue to university instructors through their research activities. The solution to the small college problem then becomes one of finding a device whereby college instructors can match, to some degree at least, the opportunities of the university instructors. As a practical plan to redress the imbalance between undergraduate training in universities and colleges, I suggest the following: • T h e establishment by a federal agency of a faculty support program by which grants, equal to 15% of annual academic salary, can be made to science faculty members in purely undergraduate, four-year institutions. Such grants would permit and encourage these faculty members to devote two months of their summer vacation period to full-time study and work related to their responsibilities as college teachers. • Grants made under a faculty support program should not, in turn, in any way restrict a recipient from making application for support for other puiposes that also can contribute to his qualifications as a teacher, such as support for research projects (with or without students), summer institutes, travel to meetings, and the like. Of course,, only support supplementary to the salary grant could be requested; that is, the total compensation a teacher could receive for a summer period is 15% of his normal salary. • Administration of the program could be carried out most simply by leaving it to the administration of a college to request support for its faculty members. This step would give the administration some responsibility for the operation of the program locally. The paper work involved in the request and the unavoidable re-
port should be kept to a minimum, perhaps less than one page per faculty participant. Such a plan should remain flexible but at the same time provide incentive to the college teacher to participate. The need for flexibility in such a program is essential because the needs of college teachers are manifold, depending on the teacher's background and the history of his department. It is inconceivable that any agency, desirous of helping teachers in small colleges, could design and establish all the programs required to meet the individual needs. Reasons for Grant The proposed size of the grant to the individual teacher—15% of his academic salary—is based on the following argument: For research grants to university faculty, the faculty member can ask for at least two ninths (22%) of his academic salary as compensation for his services during the summer vacation period. Research grants generally carry perquisites of a sort, such as an allowance for secretarial assistance, an allowance for travel, and the like. Indeed, with NSF research grants, the investigator's institution itself automatically receives 10% of the investigator's compensation. This 10% is a special institutional grant to support and improve scientific activities of the institution. This special grant is in addition to the usual indirect costs item allowed the institution. Thus, for each university faculty member engaged in research during the summer period, the granting agency makes available funds equivalent to at least 25% of the faculty member's academic salary. The research activity of a university faculty member results in a twofold gain: directly, in the form of research results and indirectly, as a benefit to his competence as a teacher. No reasonable estimate can possibly be made of the relative values of these two gains. However, taking into account the perquisites, direct and indirect, mentioned earlier, perhaps as much as 15% of the faculty member's salary might represent the amount of the total support by a granting agency that can be counted as support for his teaching activities. Advocacy of a summer stipend of 15% of the academic salary for teachers in small colleges aims, therefore, to give this group of teachers substantially the
same emolument available to university teachers, thus supporting these college teachers in activities that make them better teachers. The approximate cost of a faculty support program can be calculated as follows. There are about 2000 chemistry teachers in small institutions, public and private. Assuming the average academic salary of these teachers to be $10,000, and assuming also that only three fourths of this group would avail themselves of a grant for professional activity during the summer vacation period, the cost of the program for chemistry teachers would be $2.25 million. For biology, chemistry, and physics together the program could be carried for less than $7.5 million. This cost is probably a maximum figure because, were the suggested program to go into effect, some existing programs could be discontinued with a resultant saving. This $7.5 million figure is well under 1% of the support given by federal agencies to research by academic investigators in these fields. Other Values of Plan A collateral advantage of the plan is quite important and should not be overlooked. Before the war, young Ph.D. chemists prized an appointment to the staff of a small college. Today, however, their attitude is quite different—and understandably so. For them, graduate school has been a place of intense research activity. To move from this to a position on the staff of a small college is to leave the main current of chemical activity for what appears to be a stagnant backwater. Furthermore, graduate students are well informed about the financing of research grants, including the two-ninths basis for compensating faculty members who have research grants. They also know that this special support is practically unavailable to them at present should they choose teaching chemistry in a small college as a career. This faculty support program would have the effect of improving the attitude of young Ph.D. chemists toward a teaching career in small colleges, a change that is vital to our total educational system. The suggested program is subject to at least one adverse, perhaps fundamental, criticism: Why should selected disciplines in a small college be subsidized by the Federal Government? There is no good answer to JUNE
14, 196 5 C&EN
107
this criticism other than that this dif ferential subsidy is already in effect elsewhere for the purpose of building up the nation's scientific and techno logical resources. One can hope that in this transition period inequalities created by the exigencies of the times will have a limited life. Shortage of College Teachers "The Flight from Teaching" is a "summary of a discussion by trustees of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching." This summary is rich in incisive observa tions and comments on the current and prospective shortage of college and university teachers, and on prob lems faced in meeting this shortage. The following passage is from the es say from a section entitled "Restoring the Status of Teaching": "It would be folly to suppose that the status of college teaching can be restored without the active collabora tion of the Federal Government. In some measure, at least, the problem stems from the enormous impact of federal grants on the academic world. Responsible university leaders agree that that impact has been on the whole highly beneficial. In the matter under discussion, however, there can be no doubt that federal grants have helped to create the problem we must now solve. And we shall not solve it until we bring about some changes in gov ernmental attitude and practice. Put ting the matter broadly, the Federal Government must understand how es sential it is to maintain the vitality of our colleges and universities as teach ing institutions. It must see that with out that vitality, these institutions will ultimately be of little help to it in achieving its research and develop ment goals. "If federal agencies ever see that point clearly, they will find ways to be helpful. Congress is reluctant to ap prove funds that go directly into
Suggested Additional Reading 1. Astin, A. W., "Who Goes Where to College," Chicago, 111., Science Re search Associates, 1965. 2. Wolfle, Dael, "America's Resources of Specialized Talent," New York, N.Y., Harper & Brothers, 1954.
108
C&EN
JUNE
14, 196 5
teachers' salaries, but there are plenty of other steps that can be taken . . . ." This series of articles on the educa tion and training of chemists in the U.S. would be incomplete if it did not give credit to the ACS Committee on Professional Training. The measure of the effectiveness of the committee's policies and actions is the change that has resulted during the 28 years the committee has been in existence. In 1940, when the committee's first re port was issued, it could place only 65 institutions on its approved list (deci sions in a few cases were still pend ing). Today, the number is 316. What is even more impressive, however, is the appreciation of the history of our educational system which the committee has displayed in dealing with an extremely complex situation. For example, in its first re port (1940), the committee expressed its guiding principle as follows: "From the outset the committee has realized that its objectives will only be achieved through a frank exchange of opinion, the encouragement of growth from within these institutions in re sponse to their own efforts, and a gen eral policy of friendly and zealous co operation."
"There may be departments of chemistry in schools not on the ap proved list of the American Chemical Society which meet the minimum standards of the Society but are un aware that a request for study or re consideration by the Committee on Professional Training must be initiated by the presidents of their respective institutions. The committee is glad to cooperate with such departments if invited to do so . . . ." The members of the committee, past and present, deserve the applause of the American Chemical Society both for their achievements and for the understanding way in which they have approached their assignment.
You Can Purchase Reprints of This Four-Part C&EN Feature Series Copies of this complete four-part series of feature articles on the Education and Training of Chem ists in the U.S. are available at the following prices:
Need for Small Schools This principle is still adhered to as evidenced in the following quotation, from the latest CPT report: "The Committee on Professional Training recognizes that there are many institutions having adequate in struction in chemistry which are not on the Society's list of approved schools. These institutions may offer excellent training in chemistry within their stated educational objectives or to the extent permitted by their par ticular circumstances without profess ing to prepare students for professional work in chemistry upon their gradua tion with the bachelor's degree. Nev ertheless, they send many of these stu dents to graduate schools to complete their professional training and these students often make excellent records in their graduate work. The commit tee feels strongly that this type of in stitution is very valuable in the Amer ican system of education. Graduate schools and employers of chemists will continue to recognize that high-qual ity students, soundly trained in the elementary principles of chemistry, graduate from colleges not on the ap proved list of the Society.
1 to 49 copies—$1.00 each 50 to 99 copies—20% discount Prices for larger quantities available on request
TO:
REPRINT DEPARTMENT ACS Publications 1155 Sixteenth Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036
FROM:
Name
Street
City
ι
State
"
•
Number of copies
ι J L
Zip code
|
ι
ι Amount enclosed $
! 1
No.
41
in the
ADVANCES IN CHEMISTRY SERIES
NEW APPROACHES TO PEST CONTROL AND ERADICATION This roundup of "new approaches" in pesticide research provides broad yet specific background for further research in this fast-changing field. These eight papers, mostly by research men in the U. S. Department of Agriculture, were given before a symposium sponsored by the Pesticides Subdivision of the Division of Agricultural and Food Chemistry at the 142nd Meeting of the ACS in September 1962.
New approaches include eradication of species... chemosterilants . . . the development of insect attractants . . . the discovery of "antifeeding" compounds . . . the breeding of field crops for insect resistance and disease resistance. Continued energetic research is needed to keep ahead of insect encroachment.
If you are interested in a "bird's-eye view" of recent insecticide research, this volume offers you a unique vantage point. It will have lasting reference value for those at work on this urgent problem.
74 pages.
Price: $3.75
Paper bound.
Order from: Special Issues Sales/American Chemical Society/1155 Sixteenth Street, N.W./Washington, D.C. 20036 JUNE
14,
196 5 C & E N
109
ASCO
DIRECTORY This
section
CALS Resins,
includes:
SECTIOI>
CHEMI
Advertising
EXCHANGE—Chemicals, Gums,
Oils,
Waxes,
ments, e t c . ; E Q U I P M E N T
Rates:
$57 per inch.
Pig
on
MART
contract
vertisement
—New E q u i p m e n t , I n s t r u m e n t s ; F a
one
column.
cilities
even
lineal
for
Plant
TECHNICAL
and
Laboratory;
SERVICES—Con
space—4"
TEFLON®
Space
rate
GLAND
is
For Rotary Seals
Lower rates available basis.
An 7
measures
"inch"
inch
Thermometer Ports
on
Entry Tubes
/ 8 " deep
Additional
per
ad
units.
space
in
Maximum
Directory
per
issue.
s u l t a n t s ; Engineering, Testing, P r o
Set ads due 21 days in advance of
fessional Services.
publication ; plated ads, 17 days.
• Standard taper joints • Supplied for 6mm., 8mm. or 10mm. shafts and glass tubing • Vacuum tight to 10~6mm. Hg. • Inner and Outer " 0 " ring seals • Operating temperatures as high as 200° C. • No contamination to reactants • No breakage of parts or freezing
CHEMICALS EXCHANGE
• Will not wear loose
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Where the good is better and the better best— EASTERN Organics are best by test!
A n i l i n e P h o s p h a t e & Sulfate ·
N,N-Diphenylbenzidine
F l a v i a n i c A c i d S o d i u m Salt · Potassium P h t h a l i m i d e ·
Orcein
PRICE, G l a n d O n l y 6 m m . only $15.25 ea. 6, 8, o r 1 0 m m .$15.25 ea. 6, 8, o r 1 0 m m $19.25 ea. 6, 8, o r 1 0 m m $21.10ea. 6 , 8 , or 10mm $25.00 ea.
10/30 24/40 29/42 34/45 45/50
Direct order shipped immediately airmail prepaid
S
ARTHUR F. SMITH CO.
1 - B r o m o n a p h t h a l e n e · m-Cresyl A c e t a t e · D i - n - P r o p y l Ether C h l o r o a c e t a l d e h y d e · Cuprous Bromide · M a l o n i c 1 - O c t a d e c y l Bromide · P h e n y l u r e a · D i p h e n y l u r e a · Bilirubin · G u a n i d i n e
HCI ( 1 0 0 % ) ·
Lactonitrile
Triphenylphosphine
Write for list N-65 of other organic chemicals. Tel.: 201 696-1700
Z i p Code 07440
EASTERN CHEMICAL CORPORATION PHOTOPOLYMERIZATION
P E Q U A N N O C K , N. J.
Potassium-ferf-butyl alcoholate
REAGENTS
Alcohol-free d r y powder. Now available in pilot plant
MONOMER-POLYMER LABORATORIES Tki Btrin CkMkil Crapaay.tax9522, r i b . 24, Pa.
201 S. W . 12th A v e . P o m p a n o Beach, Florida
Acid
quantities.
MSA Research Corporation
Bench-Type
VACUUM FILTER white chemical porcelain
Commercial Division · C a l l e r y , Pennsylvania Two piece c o n s t r u c t i o n 1,3,5-TRIETHYLHEXAHYDRO-s-TRIAZINE 1,3,5-TRIISOPROPYL HEXAHYDRO-5-TRIAZINE Please write for catalog of research intermediates manufactured by
PURINES & PYRIMIDINES
The Ames Laboratories, Inc. 200 Rock Lane, M i l f o r d , Conn.
simple design
Sturdy and
Two sizes: 2 and 7 gal
working capacity. Both sizes less than 10" high.
U.S. STONEWARE AKRON 9, OHIO
19H
Adenine, Synthetic (purified and technical grades) Adenine Hydrochloride
Vi
EQUIPMENT MART
Hydrate
Adenine Sulfate Dihydrate 4,S-Diaminopyrimidine Hydrochloride
TECHNICAL SERVICES
4VS- Dihydroxy-5-nitropyri midine
STAINLESS STEEL TANKS
4,6-Dihydroxypyrimidine 2,4t5,S-Tetraaminopyrimidine Sulfate Hydrate 2,4,6-Triamino-5-nitrosopyrimidine 4,5,6-Triaminopyrimidine Sulfate Hydrate Look to A r a p a h o e to fill y o j r r e q u i r e ments o f Purines a n d P y r i m i d i n e s !
Type 304, 400 P.S.I., %" pipe thread openings each end except A4 and A6 which have VA" opening. J - l , 24 χ 48", 80 g a l . , 10 g u a g e , w t . $QQ50 150 l b s . , s h i p . w t . 250 l b s . N e w ' * G - l 12 χ 24*. 16 g a u g e , w t . 24 l b s . 1050 I U Perfect. Like n e w F-l, 8'/ 2 χ 1 8 \ 16 g a u g e , w t . 12 l b s . 1J50 I n Perfect. Like n e w CARBON STEEL TANKS 400 P.S.I. A-6, 5 χ 1 4 ' / 2 \ N e w . W t . 4 l b s 5.95 A-4, 5'/ 2 χ 8*, N e w . W t . 2 l b s 3.95 O x y g e n c y l i n d e r , 3 % χ 1 2 ! / 2 " , 1000 P.S.I., p r e s s . a., safety & l o a d i n g valves, 2 o p e n i n g s w i t h ,*" p i p e t h r e a d p l u g s , w t . 8 l b s . N E W 15.95 All F.O.B. Chicago, except J-1, F.O.B. Baton Rouge, La. Terms, 2%—10 days, net 30. Prompt shipment.
g
ARAPAHOE CHEMICALS, INC. 2855 WALNUT STREET · BOULDER, COLORADO PRODUCERS OF FINE ORGANIC CHEMICALS
110
C&EN
J U N E
14, 1 9 6 5
ILLINOIS MFG. SUPPLY CO. 1829 S. S t a t e , C h i c a g o , III. 60616 D e p t . C E N
CLARK MICROANALYTICAL LABORATORY C H , N , S, Halogen, Fluorine, Oxygen, Allcoxyl, Alkmide, Acetyl, Terminal Methyl, etc., by spe cialists in organic mi croche mi cal analysis. Howard S. Clark, Director P.O. Box 1 7 , Phone: 217-367-8406, Urbane, III. SCHWARZKOPF MICROANALYTICAL LABORATORY 56-19 37th A v e , Woodside Ν . Ύ. 11377 Telephone Code 212, HAvemeyer 9-6248, 9-6223 Complete Analysis of Organic Compounds. Results within one week. Elements, Functional Groups, Molecular Weights Physical Constants, Spectra ANALYSIS OF ORGANO METALLICS, BORO-FLUORO AND SILICON COMPOUNDS Trace Analysis Microanalytical Research
Micro-Analysis, Inc. P. O. Box 5088 Wilmington, Delaware 19808 Phon«: C o d · 302—WYman 4-6531 B* mental Microanalysis of Organic Compounds Results within on· womk.
TRIANGLE vAemUa/
^aocra/arcei,
Jitc,
ELEMENTAL MICROANALYSIS Organic - Inorganic P. O. Box 391 Phone: 942-4754
Chapel Hill, N. C. Area Code 919
Philadelphia, WIBG, Sun. 6:45 A.M., Philadel phia Philadelphia, WFLN-AM-FM, Sat. (alternating Saturdays) 12:05 P.M., Philadelphia Pittsburgh, WDUQ-FM, Thurs. 9:30 P.M., Pittsburgh State College. WMAJ, Fri. 6:30 P . M . , Central Pennsylvania Tyrone, WTRN, Sat. 6:15 P.M., Central Pennsyl vania Wilkes-Barre, WILK, Sat. 9:30 P . M . , Kings College Williamsport. WLYC, Sat. 5:30 P.M., Susque hanna Valley Williamsport, WRAK, Wed. 7:45 P.M., Susque hanna Valley
PUERTO RICO Santurce, WKYN, Sun. 1 P.M., Puerto Rico
RHODE ISLAND RAD
SERVICES...
Analyses & Testing / Product-Process Derelopment / Synthesis / Systems / Food Science / New Instru ments / Inrestigations / Air Pollution / Cigarette Smoke / Industrial Training / General Research SADTLER RESEARCH LABORATORIES, INC. 3322 Spring Garden Street, Phila., Pa. 19104 215-EV 2-7800
LEBERC0 LABORATORIES
Φ
Industrial Toxicity Cosmetic Toxicity Pharmaceutical Toxicity Hormone Assays * Research Send for information concerning our services
127 HAWTHORNE ST., ROSELLE PARK, N.J. CROBAUGH LABORATORIES—SINCE 1894 ELEMENTAL MICROCHEMICAL ANALYSIS ORGANIC—INORGANIC IR—UV—Flame—GC—XRD—XRF Particle Size Pesticide Residues 3510 MacCorkle Ave., S.E. 3800 Perkins Ave. Charleston, W. Va. 25304 Cleveland, Ohio 44114 304-925-1161 216-881-7320
ACS on the Air Continued from page 85
Providence, WJAR, Tue. 7:45 P.M., & Thurs. 7:45 P.M., Rhode Island
SOUTH CAROLINA
Columbia, WIS, Wed. 7:45 P.M., South Carolina
SOUTH DAKOTA Sioux Falls, KSOO, Sun. 12:20 P.M., Sioux Valley
TENNESSEE Cookeville, WHUB, Sun. 7:45 P.M., Tennessee Polytechnic Institute Knoxville, WUOT-FM, Wed. 2:45 P.M., Eastern Tennessee , .. Nashville, WPLN, Fri. 5:15 P.M., Nashville T E X A S
χ ,
r
rr
Atlanta, KALT, Mon. 1:15 P.M., Ark-La-Tex Bonham, KFYN, Sat. 11:45 A.M., Ark-La-Tex Borger, KHUZ, Sat. 6:45 P.M., Panhandle Plains Carthage, KG AS, Sat. 11:45 A.M., Ark-La-Tex Gladewater, KEES, Sat. 7 A.M., Ark-La-Tex Greenville, KGVL, Sat. 1 P.M., East Texas State College Henderson, KGRI, Tue. 2:05 P.M., Ark-La-Tex Longview, KLUE-FM, Sun. 9:45 P.M., Ark-LaTex Lubbock, KTXT, Tue. 4 P.M., Texas Techno logical College „ m Marshall, KADO, Fri. 3:30 P.M., East Texas Baptist College Λ mma Odessa, KOCV-FM, Mon. 9:45 A.M., & Fri. 9:45 A.M., Odessa College r # . Port Neches, KPNG, Sat 4 P.M., Texas-Louisi ana Gulf _ Λ ,m Sinton, KTOD, Sun. 11 A.M., & Tue. 6:15 P.M., South Texas Λ , „ m Texarkana, KTFS, Sun. 8:30 A.M., Ark-La-Tex
UTAH
OHIO, continued Painesville, WPVL, Sat. 11 A.M., Northeastern Ohio Toledo, WTOL, Sun. 10:45 P.M., Toledo Wilberforce, WJSC-FM, Wed. 6 P.M., Central State College Wooster, WWST-AM-FM, Sun. 4:45 P.M., Wooster Youngstown, WFMJ, Sat. 6:15 P.M., Penn-Ohio Border
OKINAWA Naha, KSAB, Sat. 4:30 P.M., ACS Office
National
OKLAHOMA Bartlesville, KWON, Sun. 9:05 P.M., Oklahoma Ponca City, WBBZ, Sun. 6:15 P.M., North Cen tral Oklahoma Tulsa, KIHI, Sun. 10:30 P.M., Tulsa
Logan, KVNU, daily 7:15 P.M., Salt Lake Salt Lake City, KCPX, Mon. 6:45 P . M . , Salt Lake
VIRGINIA Bridgewater, WVBC, Mon. 10 P.M., Bridgewater College , , ^ Bristol, WCYB, Sun. 4:15 P.M., Northeast Ten nessee , , , Danville, WILA, Sun. 12:45 P.M., Virginia Harrisonburg, WEMC-FM, Mon. 7:15 P.M., Eastern Mennonite College Richmond, WRVA, Sat. 6:30 P.M., Virginia Richmond, WLEE, Sun. 10:15 P.M., Virginia Waynesboro, WAYB, Sat. 11 A.M., Virginia Williamsburg, WBCI, Sun. 12:15 P.M., College of William and Mary
WASHINGTON Pasco, KALE, Sun. β P.M., Richland
WASHINGTON, D.C. WAMU-FM, Fri. 7:45 P.M., American
University
ONTARIO
WEST VIRGINIA
Brockville, CFJR, Fri. 7 P.M., C1C
Charleston, WTIP, Sun. 4:30 P.M., Kanawha Elkins, WDNE, Sat. 7:30 P.M., Northern West Virginia _ ._ „ . Morgantown, WAJR, Fri. 7:15 P.M.. Northern West Virginia
PENNSYLVANIA Bloomsburg, WCNR, Mon. 9:45 A.M., Susque hanna Valley Braddock, WLOA-AM-FM, Sat. 3:30 P.M., Pittsburgh Carlisle, WHYL, Sat. 9 A.M., Southeastern Pennsylvania Columbia, WCOY, Sun. 7:45 A.M., Southeastern Pennsylvania Elizabethtown, WWEC, Fri. 2:05 P.M., South eastern Pennsylvania Gettysburg, WGET, Mon. 7:15 P.M., South eastern Pennsylvania Lebanon, WLBR-AM-FM, Sun. 9:30 A.M., Southeastern Pennsylvania
Red, w h i t e & blue chip investment You won't get rich overnight buy ing U. S. Savings Bonds. But for the long run, they make an excel lent investment. You get a guaranteed rate of interest—3%% when held to ma turity—so there are no ups and downs to worry about. You also get certain tax advan tages since Savings Bonds aren't subject to state or local income taxes and the federal tax can be deferred until the Bonds are cashed. But probably most important is that Bonds pay off in more than dollars. When you get your Bond investment back, you know it has helped Uncle Sam strengthen the cause of freedom (your cause) all around this troubled world of ours. Buy U. S. Savings Bonds and own a share of America. It's a good outfit to do business with.
Buy U.S. Savings Bonds STAR-SPANGLED SAVINGS PLAN FOR ALL AMERICANS : ~ V
WISCONSIN Madison, WHA, Tue. 2 P.M., University of Wisconsin „ . . Λ Milwaukee, WUWM, Tue. 8 P.M., University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee w , New Richmond, WIXK, Sun. 4:15 P.M., Wis consin State University
WYOMING Laramie, KOWB, Sun. 4:35 P.M.,
Wyoming
' \ . ^ . • The U. S. Government does not pay for this advertisement. It is presented as a public service in cooperation with the Treasury Department and The Advertising Council.
JUNE
14,
1965
C&EN
111
