WILLIAM J. BAILEY University of Maryland College Park, Maryland 20740
". . . both students and industry have a stake . . . TI
Several other authors in this symposium will emphasize the importance of polymer chemistry in our industrial society and within the chemical industry. I t can be estimated that as high as two-thirds of all graduates in chemistry will take positions with industrial firms or government laboratories that have some conncction with polymer chemistry. It is indeed ironic, therefore, that very few of these graduates will have had a course in polymer chemistry during their training, or contact with any polymcr chemistry in any of the basic courses while they wcre in school. This situation arises from the fact that many of our leading universities have 110 polymcr chemist on their chemistry staffs and that vcry few chemists with research interests in polymer chcmistry are being added to any chemistry staff. I n general, academic chemists know very lit,tle polymcr chemistry, and as a result have a very low opinion of polymer chemistry, regarding it as something that is necessary in industry, but not a suitable subject for the trairiing of chemist,^. The prestige of polymer chemistry within our scientific community and within the chemistry departments, in particular, appears to be a t a low ebb. To emphasize the conditions a little bit more dramatically, let us look a t only one aspect of polymer chemistry, the organic chemistry of polymers. It has been estimated that nearly one-half of all chemists today are organic chcmists, and that nearly three-fourths of all graduate students in organic chemistry will take an industrial position that has some contact with polymer chemistry. Yet these students will have little or no opportunity to learn even the very elementary aspects of polymer chemistry. The prime reason, of course, is that there are practically no organic chcmists with au interest in, or knowledge of, polymers on the chemistry staffs of our colleges and universities today. It comes as a mild revelation to my chemical colleagues whenever this fact is pointed out t o them. I n my conversat,ions with even my polymer chemical colleagues I have often asked them to name the organic chemists that do research on polymers in academic institutions. Rarely can anyone name as many as ten. How many can you name? With so few organic polymer chemists scattered throughout t,he teaching institutions of the United States it, is not hard t.0 understand, therefore, why there arc very few separate courses in the organic chemistry of polymers, and that without a strong advocak of the suhjcct present why it gets no more than a mentiorr in any of the basic organic courses being offered in our 500
/
Journol of Chemicol Education
colleges and universit,ies. Since the t,ypical organic teacher knows vcry little polymer chemistry, if hc does include ally mention of it in a basic course, it is ofteu i n a deragntory manncr with a discussion of the "goos" and t / gunks" that result from a polymerization reaction. T o get an idea of mhat is covered in many orgauic courses, all one has to do is cxamine a r~umberof leading textbooks in begiruiing organic chemistry. Many of the authors, if they want t o say anything about polymerization, put this near the back of the hook, so that it can be one of the chapters conveuiently dropped if the instructor gets behind in his teaching schedulc. I do not want to give thc impressiou that all facets of the university communit,y have a low opiniou of polymer chcmistry. I'm- some stmngc rensnn, it secms highly respectablc to he a poly~ner chemist i n the cnginecring collcgcs, aud thc d ~ p a r t n l ~ l l of t s chemical cngiriccring, in particular. This acceptability is eviderit from the new cnmprehcusive programs mithiii engineering colleges a t Case-Western Reserve University, the University of Rlassachusctts, the State University of Kew York a t Buffalo, the Iteusselaer Polytechnic Institute, Xorth Carolina Statc University, arid the University of Toronto. These programs, of course, will increase the number of graduate students with a polymer speciality enterirrg the industrial community. However, this trend will accentuate the difference between this specialit,y aud thc polymer training within the chemistry dcpartmcnts. I even fear that this growth of polymer interest in thc cugineering colleges will he used as an excuse to de-emphasize mhat little polymer chemistry does cxist within chemistry departments and will, therefore, further delay the introduction of any polymer chemistry in the training of the average chemistry graduate. A second segment of the academic community where polymer chemistry appears to bc respectable is in the field of biopolymers. Of course, many of the chemists studying biopolymers are either in separate departments of biochemistry or connected with the medical schools. They seem to havc been able t o maintain their prestige, Em~on'sNOTE William J. Bailey is research professor of cheniisl~yat, the Universit,y of Mnryland. He received his B. Chem. f m m ihe Universily of Minnesota (1943) and PhI) from the University of Illirrois (1046). IIe was A. I). Little Postdoctoral Fellow a t the Mmsnchusetts Institute of Technology in 1946-47. From there he went to Wayne State University where he was Assistant P ~ d e s s r w(1947-40) arrd Associate Professor (104941). IIis research interests include pymlysis of estcrs, cyclic diclms, polyinlclear aromslir hydrocarhms, acctylencs, phosphorus compounds, and high polymers. His pmfessionnl and scientific associations includo Chairman of the 1)ivision of Polymer Chemistry (1!)67), Chairman, National Research Corutcil-National Academy of Seictlce Commitlee o n hlacromaleadnr Chemistry, and Chairman of the Washinpion Section of American Chemical Society (1961). He has h e m x member of the Editwial Board of thc Journal q f Ovganie Chemislr?,, and is cwrently on the Boards nf Alacm,nolec~ilarSynthesis, R e e d o j C h e n ~ . icnl Progress, the Jouvnalqf Pol?lrner ~Scicnce,and the J o w nal o j Alacromolecxlar Chemislr!,. IIc has pi~l,lishedover 00 papers, and his work in the field nf the pyrolysis of esters was awarded the first F a t t y Acid P1.odtlcer's Rescnl.ch Award in 193.i.
possihly hec:rnse the hiopolymers are not highly com~ncrcinlaud the chemists working in this field have cmp11:rsizcd t,he biological aspects of the problem and not t,he polymeric aspect,^. I n fact, in the presentation of their results and the application for funds for the support nf their research they have a greater tendency to associatc with the biochemist rather than with the typical polymer chemist. Unfortunately, then, the typical chemistry major has little contact with these hiochemical polymer scient,ists during his professional training. Let us see if we cau find out some of the reasons for this situation in t,he academic community. I think that the situation arises at least partially due to a series of misconcept,ions of polymer chemistry and its operation. For example, one myth that seems very prevalent today is that t,he financing of research in the polymer of money into t.he academic community for polymer research, and that the federal government is also supplying a considerable sum for basic research. Nothing could he further from the truth. Industry does do a lot of basic and applied research in its own laboratories in the field of polymers, since they have such vital stakes in the products. However, very litt,le of this money is charuielecl into academic research in polymer chemist,ry. Industrial companies, in general, have a tendency t,o donate money to universities and chemistry depart,ments, in particular, with few, if any, st,rings attached. These free-grant funds, t,hercfore, are allocated by nonpolymer chemists wit,hin the chemistry departments, with very little of the funds ending up supporting polymer chemistry. The polymer chemist also finds it very difficult to get funds from agencies of the federal government that usually support basic research in academic institutions. For example, the National Science Fouudat,ion has a system of review of research by other chemists, usually in the academic a~mmunity. If anorganic chemist submits a prnposal to t,he ATationalScience Foundation on t,he synthesis of new polymers, it is usually not reviewed by academic polymer chemists in the field of organic chemistry, since there are so few of t,hem, but is reviewed by nonpolymer organic chemists. For this reason, it is usnallv given a low rating and does not receive support. The same can be said of many of the nongovernmeotal agencies that disperse funds for basic research in chemistry; for instance, the Petroleum Research Fund operates in much the same way. Thus, a very minute portion of these funds which originated in industry ever sees its way to support polymer chemistry. Symptomatic of this condition is the fact that out of one hundred starter grants awarded by the Petroleum Research Fund last year only one could be conceivably called polymer chemistry. These are grants given to young scientists who are just starting their academic careers. It appears so difficult to get money from these agencies that have reviews of proposals by nonpolymer chemists that many of the polymer chemists in academic life figure it is not worthwhile even to submit a proposal a t the present time. On the other hand, there is a great deal of money available from other governmental agencies, such as the Department of Defense. However, many of these agencies have a definite mission t o accomplish, and
many of their funds are very specifically related t o the production of end items and not necessarily for basic research where the main research goal is the understanding of the basic principles and t,he obtaining of information. Many of these projects that are geared t o end items do not make good thesis problems for graduate students. As a consequence, the academic polymer chemist has t o be extremely careful in the acceptance of these funds, lest he actually prove the truth of many of the accusations of many of his academic nonpolymer colleagues. Since it is so difficult t o attract good chemists or "top-flight" chemists into the academic polymer community, many of the chemists who might normally do polymer research find it much easier to get financing for noripolymeric problems. This appears to be a vicious circle that is hard t o break. Anot,her myth arises from the industrial chemist who, when asked what type of training he would like his new employee to have, replies that he would rather take a chemist with a good basic training in all phases of chemistry, and teach him t,he polymer chemistry that he needs on the jnb. This is a misleading statement in several respects. First, it implies that there is something incompatible with good basic training arid polymer chemistry. Further, if you press him, you will find that that is not what he means a t all. What he really means is that there are so few chemists with polymer training available that he will hire good technical people whenever available, even t,hough he knows that it mill be necessary t o train his own polymer chemists, and that he would not hire a poor polymer chemist in preference t~oa good nonpolymer chemist. He is also implying that he wants the polymer chemist that he does hire to have a broad training in all aspects of chemistry and not just t o he a technician. Many companies have est,imat,cd that it costs as much as $60,000 a year t o maintain a PhD chemist at t,he bench in a research laboratory. I think that most industrial people would agree t,hat this represents a terrific expense for the training of their own polymer chemists. This training certainly would be done more efficiently and more satisfactorily in an academic institution. Another aspect of this same problem is that a chemist without any polymer training or orientation finds it very difficult to interview companies who are trying to hire potent,ial polymer chemists. There is often a lack of understanding and a lack of communication between the prospective employee and employer. Therefore, both the student and industry have a definit,e stake in having the student learn enough polymer chemist,ry so that he a t least has an appreciation of the importance of polymer chemistry in industry and an understanding of the type of problems and research that industry does in this field. This is strictly a minimum requiremeut for the student and t,he company t o he able t o arrive a t an intelligent decision concerning employment. Ideally, polymer chemistry should be intertwined throughout all chemical tmining, both graduate and undergraduate, because of the high probability that a chemist will eventually work in the polymer field. Every chemist should be introduced t o polymers or polymerization reactions in every elementary course, especially beginning organic and physical chemistry. Examples from the polymer field should he systematically included in graduate courses, such as spectroscopy, Volume
45, Number 8 , August 1968
/
501
thcrmodynamicn, kinctics, reaction mechanisms, stereochemistry, and natural products. This would have the advantage that, most chemists would be familiar with, if not trained in,,polymers, and would also reverse thc trcnd in academlc communities toward cleavage into two groups, those who arc polymer chemists and those who have had 1itt.le or no contact with polymers and, therefore, havc a low opinion of polymer chemistry. The most feasible way that this can bc accomplished is t,o have a t least one polymerchemist in every chemistry department. He then can do the educational or missionary work necessary t o get his colleagues to introduce more arid more polymer chemistry into their basic courses. I am certainly convinced that if there is
502
/
Journol of Chemicol Education
no polymer chemist on a chemistry staff, such an cducational process is impossible. I n order to attract this increasing number of polymer chemists to the academic staffs, industry will have t o play more than just a passive role. It will have to speak up, tell the chemistry departments what kind of training they would really like, and do something about the support of polymer research in our universities and colleges. Finally, a different Bind of system for allocat,ing research funds by industry, governmental agencies, and fnundations must be inaugurated. This change cannot take place through the efforts of the members of the academic community alone, but me must have hclp, both spiritually and materially, from our industrial colleagues.
