Robert D. Vold
University of Southern California LOS Angeles
Summer Conference: Fundamental Aspects of Colloid and Macromolecular Chemistry
The idea for the Conference originated at the University of Southern California as a result of discussions between Karol J. Mysels, Robert Simha, Marjorie J. Vold, and the author. The initiating spark was Mysels' survey1 which had shown how little time was devoted to colloid chemistry in undergraduate courses in quantitative analysis and physical chemistry. Long before this, however, the problem had been evident in the difficulty of findmg good graduate students interested in this field and in the inability of the schools to satisfy the urgent industrial demand for PhD's trained in these areas. The urgency of this situation is made further apparent by the fact that in Russia a course in colloid chemistry is a part of the basic core training2 in contrast to the prevalent attitude in this country that it is an expendable extra or a nonfundamental specialty. A contributing factor to this attitude very likely is the fact that many American college teachers have themselves had no formal training in colloid or macromolecular chemistry. Previous efforts to increase undergraduate interest in colloid chemistry had not been sufficiently successful. For several years there has been-and still is-an Presented as part of the Symposium on the Teaching of Colloid and Surface Chemistry before the Divisions of Colloid and Surface Chemistry and Chemical Education st the 140th ACS Meeting, Chicago, September, 1961. 37.355 (1960). MYSELS,K. J., J. CEEM.EDUC., C h m . Eng. A'ews, Sept. 26 (1960), p. 64.
annual prize contest for undergraduate essays or research projects in colloid chemistry, administered by the University of Southern California under the supervision of Professor Mysels and financed by the Continental Oil Company. Nevertheless discussion showed that of 35 professors attending the Conference, which was held last summer, only seven were aware of the existence of this contest. Moreover, of 20 who were teaching courses in physical chemistry, only 11 spent any time formally on colloid and surface chemistry. Similar lack of appreciation is evident in the relatively small number of professors who attend the Polymer Lecture Series, given a t the University of Southern California under the management of Professor Simha, even though the lectures are given by such giants in the polymer field as Debye, Mark, Eiich, Rochow, and others. Attendance by industrial research men is high, however, which is not surprising in view of the fact that in a laboratory such as that of the Shell Development Company fully half of the professional chemists at one time or other are involved with problems in colloid, surface, and macromolecular ~hemistry.~ It seemed possible that the situation might be improved if a way could be found to bring the exciting problems of colloid chemistry and the interesting applications in this area of thermodynamics, kinetics, and a WILSON,J. NORTON, preceding paper, 187 (1962).
TKIS
JOURNAL, 39
Volume 39, Number 4, April 1962
/
193
intermolecular force theory to the attention of undergraduates before they reached the stage of a settled interest. The most direct approach seemed to be to attempt to reach the teachers of these students, acquainting them with the basic equations and conceptual models of colloid chemistry, pointing out the extensions of classical thermodynamics and kinetics to systems involving giant molecules or extensive surfaces, and emphasizing its universal importance both in industrial research and in modern molecular biology and biophysics.
The Conference was run as a residential meeting with group meals and common housing so as to expedite the making of friends and provide maximum opportunity for intra-group informal discussions and exchange of experiences and attitudes. During the morning the lecturer generally presented the important fundamental aspects of his topic, devoted some time explicitly to its place in the undergraduate curriculum, and finished with a presentation of interesting current research in the field. During the afternoon the group reassembled for two to three hours, either as a whole or in smaller sections., for disrussion the -~ ~ ~ with -.-.--. ~ lecturer-and each other--of any scientific or pedagogical matters of interest, with full opportunity for individual participation. Everything was fair game: difficult points of mathematical theory, possible laboratory experiments or demonstrations, feasibility of possible research ideas, arguments for piecemeal incorporation of the subject matter versus a separate course, the nature of the real versus the ideal student, questions of instrumentation, and many more. Most of the lecturers provided outlines of their remarks and ample literature references, so the library was a busy place evenings and weekends. The reasons given by applicants for wishing to attend a conference such as this are of value for the planning of detailed programs and also for the broader question of what further ventures might be undertaken to help university and college teachers to do a better job. The commonest reason given was a wish to up-date and modernize knowledge of the subject matter. Almost as many hoped to find useful ideas for reorganizing their course in quantitative analysis or physical chemistry, or for planning a course in colloid chemistry. A very considerable number hoped to use attendance at, the conference as a substitute for formal courses in colloid or macromolecular chemistry for which they felt a need but which were unavailable to them. A similar number wanted suggestions on pedagogical use of colloidal topics or assistance in research. Other reasons given included opportunity to hear prominent lecturers, desire for personal inspiration, and desire to profit from group .stimulation. Some statistics concerning the group of participants a t the conference may be of interest. Of the 36 participants, 31 of whom received support from the NSF, all but one already had the PhD degree. This group was picked by a committee from 101 applicants as being best qualified to profit from the conference and most likely to be able to pass on its stimulation to considerable numbers of students; unquestionably many equally deserving candidates had to be refused. I t is worth remarking that out of the initial 31 offers 30 were accepted. The participants came from 21 diierent states; 18 of the 36 were faculty members at schools with ACS-accredited departments of chemistry. Only 5 or 6 of the group had published papers extensively in recent years but 27 of the 36 had at least one publication in the last five years. Twenty had the responsibility for the physical chemistry course at their schools; the other 16 were in quantitative analysis. ~
Objectives and Program
Accordingly a plan was developed for gathering together a group of qualified and influential instructors in quantitative analysis and physical chemistry to examine selected aspects of the subject matter of colloid, surface, and macromolecular chemistry in some detail and to evaluate its suitability for inclusion in the undergraduate curriculum (both in separate courses and as an integral part of the traditional courses in quantitative analysis and physical chemistry). This concept was considered (by mail) by the members of the Executive Committee of the Division of Colloid Chemistry, who approved it in principle, and was then submitted as a formal proposal to the NSF by the author, who later served as director of the conference. The specific objectives of the conference were to demonstrate the adaptability of the subject matter of colloid and macromolecular chemistry to undergraduate instruction in quantitative analysis and physical chemistry, to acquaint a larger number of students with this subject matter so as to facilitate independent study later on, to attract more graduate students to a study of colloid, surface, and macromolecular chemistry, and to develop an enthusiasm and respect for this subject among college and university teachers who are not themselves specializing or doing research in these areas. For this first conference the following program was arranged, with each topic allotted one full day for presentation and discussion. Brownian Motion, Diffusion, m d Ultrscentrifugd Analysis J. L. Oncley, Harvard Medical School Nucleation and Growth in the Formation of Solids from Solution Bdsorption from Solution and the Properties of the Adsorbed Film R. D. Vold, University of Southern California Chromatographic Separations R. L. Pecsok, University of California at Los Angeles Gas Adsorption and Catalysis Surface Tension: Wetting and Spreading Phenomena A. W. Adamson, University of Southern California Electrokinetic Phenomena K. J. Mysels, University of Southern California Thermodynamics of Polymer Solutions R. Simha, University of Southern California Viscosity Light Scattering P. J. W. Dehye, Cornell University Reaction Kinetics of High Polymer Systems R. Simha, University of Southern California Applications of Colloid and Surface Chemistry in Industrial Research J. N. Wilson, Shell Development Company
194
/
lournol of Chemicd Educafion
~~~
Evaluation
Evaluation of the effectiveness of the conference was
~
obtained from a detailed quest,ionnaire which was turned in anonymously by each of the participants; these were supplemented by personal observation and many private discussions. Only two participants failed to realize their objectives in attending the conference and seven were only part,ially satisfied, while 27 expressed themselves as being completely satisfied, many enthusiastically so. The greatest sources of sat,isfaction were their increased knowledge and understanding of the field, the suggestions for iucorporat,ion in and enrichment of the undergraduate curriculum with colloidal principles and illustrations, and the opportunity for informal contacts and discussions among t,he group. The commonest criticism was that some of the subject matter presented would he difficult to incorporate in the standard undergraduate courses. Apparently the lecturers succeeded in striking a nice balance between pedagogical method versus subject matter, and between fundamentals versus advanced topics: four respondents to the questionnaire complained that the lectures were too advanced and difficult to understand while two objected that they were too elementary and obvious; two would have liked less emphasis on teaching and more on exciting new developments while four suggested that there be more emphasis on applications to teaching. The group made several valuable suggestions for the improvement of future conferences of this same kind. Most frequent was the suggestion t,hat more time be allowed for informal contacts, for library browsing, and for visiting of facilities wit,h less formal programming. More of a workshop approach was suggested for the discussion sessions, with assignment of specific topics or problems or the preparation of a syllabus or report
as a specific objective of the discussion so as to bring group creativity into play. Breakdown into smaller discussion groups with more homogeneous interests was also frequently advocated. These ideas; as well as correction of the inevitable "beefs" about some of the physical arrangements, will he incorporated into the program if it proves possible to repeat this conference in the summer of 1962. The most significant criterion of the success of the conference, however, is the cumulative answer to the question: "What changes, if any, is attendance a t this conference likely to make in your teaching or researrh? Please he completely frank." In answer to this, 19 of the group stated they would give greater coverage to surface chemistry and polymers in their courses in analytical and physical chemistry, only five replied that it would make little or no difference in what they were doing. Four said they would encourage student research on colloidal problems. Five said they had received much help toward developing or improving a course in colloid chemistry. From these replies and others not cited here, and also from many personal conversations, it can certainly be concluded that this conference was highly beneficial in promoting greater interest in and attention to colloid, surface, and macromolecular chemistry in the main stream of undergraduate teaching. Acknowledgment
The author wishes to express his great appreciation to all the participants in the conference for the thorough and thoughtful way in which they filled out the "evaluation form," and without whose help this report would have been very incomplete.
Volume 39, Number 4, April 1962
/
195
