In-House Technicians Training Program Karen D'Arcy College of Arts and Sciences, Governors State University, University Park, IL 60466 Bobby Lathan RhBne-Poulenc Basic Chemicals Company, Chicago Heights, IL 60411 As the Rhane-Poulenc Basic Chemicals Company (formerly Stauffer Chemical Company) facility in Chicago Heights, Illinois, prepared to a modernize its production and laboratory practices, the decision was made to require more chemical education of their laboratory technicians. The laboratory management at RhBnePoulenc recognized a need for their laboratory technicians to have a stronger theoretical understanding of chemical principles and chemical analysis, including the basics of instrumental analysis techniques and computer data management. The laboratory management decided to develop an in-house trainine oroeram with an academic institution for their ~ u a l i t ~ b 9 s ~ r a n c e l ~ uControl a l i t ~ (QAIQC) technicians. Rh6ne-Poulenc chose to develoo a Droeram to be delivered by an institution of higher ed;cation to ensure the academic quality of the training program. The need to upgrade the current QAIQC staffwas apparent when the entry level job requirements were changed from one year of chemistry to a two-year Associate of Science degree in a laboratory science or equivalent. RhBne Poulenc was committed to training and retaining their existing, experienced laboratory staff. Training Objectives The primary objective of the training program was to educate the existing laboratory technicians to a minimum level of chemistrv content corres~ondinato the educational requirements for newly hiied lab&atory technicians. known as Level I. Level I training consisted of workshops designed to develop mathematical and algebraic skills and to present introductory and quantitative chemical principles. The second objective of the training program was to continue the chemistry and technology education of a p u p of the laboratory personnel resulting in staff trained as Level I1 technicians. The Level I1 technician educational requirements corresponded to the analytical chemistry content of a BS degree in chemistry. Paramount to this program was t h e training of t h e current laboratory technicians who possessed proven work skills. The third objective of the training program was to make it as accessible as possible, by providing the training on-site, and scheduling the workshops after the evening and daytime shifts. Table 1 summarizes the characteristics of the training program participants. The participants averaged 13 years on the job with a mean of 10 years, a minimum of three years, and a maximum of 31 years in the QAIQC laboratory of the RhBne-Poulenc facility. Contractual Requirements The local management at Rh6ne-Poulenc proposed the training program for laboratory technicians as part of its offer during contractual negotiations in 1986. Features of the contract included uoeradiw the educational reouirernents for laboratory technicians, creating two levcls of laboratow technician. and reauirine oarticbation of all current &chnicians in'the training p&&m. ' h e required
.-
1010
-
Journal of Chemical Education
Table 1. Characteristics of Palticipants in in-House Training Program
Level I attempted Level I completion Level Ii attempted Level II completion Required to complete Level I1 Elected to complete Level II New Hires participating in Level I I trainina
Number of Participants 15 12 10 10
8
3 2 Mean
Range
Original Staff
-
Age
Years in QNQCat R h B n e Poulenc Number of Staffwith college coursework New Hires Age Average Number of Years of College Total Participants Number of Men Number of Women
40 13
26 to 55
4
24.5
24 to 25
4
17 4
13
participation ensured that all technicians would be qualified under the new educational requirements. The final settlement for the QA/AC program required participation and successful completion of at least Level I training within the contractual period of three years. The training program included a number of positive incentives and conveniences for participation. The conveniences are overtime pay for class attendance, on-site workshop delivery, after shift class schedules, videotaped lecture sessions, professional staff tutoring, peer tutoring, professional study skill counseling, opportunities for repeated workshops, transcript evaluation and placement, and the supply of textbooks, calculators, and educational materials. The training program also contained disincentives for failure to participate and succeed. Employees who failed the workshops and did not acquire the chemistry credentials in an alternative way would be demoted from the laboratory to the plant. These employees would no longer meet minimum Level I hiring criteria and so would not be eligible to return to laboratory. There may be significant wage differences for laboratory employees, who are required to work overtime, compared to plant employees. Failure to participate in the workshops also deprived the laboratory technicians of three hours of extra overtime pay
WORKSHOP Required Anendence 1.5 Hourly Wage Supply Textbooks and Materials Tutoring Videotaped Sessions
per week. Each workshop required a minimum average score of C on assigned homework and tests. A schematic diagram, showing the features of the in-house training program, is given in the figure.
I
Curriculum The specific curriculum was developed during consultations between the professional laboratory staff of Rhdne- Poulenc and the faculty coordinators from GSU. The curriculum is based loosely on the curriculum requirements of the American Chemical Society chemistry major and tailored to RhBne-Poulenc's product line and laboratory analyses. The noncredit workshops were related to credit-bearine courses a t GSU and were taught by experienced faculty. The professional staff a t RhBne-Poulenc was involved in textbook selection and curriculum review. The program was designed to be flexible and respond to the needs of RhBne-Poulenc. The resultant curriculum was composed of seven workshops a s displayed in Table 2. The chemistry and mathematics faculty and the counseling staff of Student Affairs and Services of GSU taught the workshops. The Reentry Skills Workshop was modelled after a simi l a r noncredit course offered a t GSU for returning adult students. This workshop was team taught by two staff members from Student Affairs and Services. The Reentry Skills Workshop set a n important, positive tone for the rem a i n d e r of t h e t r a i n i n a Droeram. RhBnePoulenc arranged for the kc'ultyto be available to participants for consultation throughout the training program. Anumber of participants took advantage of this o ~ o o r t u n i t vto bolster testtaking siills, study %ategies,"and study skills. The Reentry Skills Workshop and the atmosphere created by the faculty were critical to the success of the entire training program. The Reentry Skills workshop concluded with three evaluative math tests and one language skills test that were used to access participants' math and language skills.
Community
College Course
Schematic diagram of the in-house training program.
Table 2. Curriculum for ln-House Trainina Proaram Level I Reentry Skills Workshop:Addresses time management for headof household employees, study skills and strategies,test-taking skills, and strategies for overcoming test anxiety. 3-h class period, 4-week workshop, concludes with math competency tests and reading competency test. Basic Math Workshop: Revews oasic math snil s and prepares partic~pantstor algeora. 3-h c ass per od. 4-week workshop. Algebra Workshop: Presents the basic skills and concepts of algebra, equation solving, graphing, exponents,scientific notation, units, solving quadratic equations. 3-h class periods, 1Pweek session including one review period and one test period. Basic Chemistw,Warkshon: Introduces the fundamentals of chem~casc'ence lncl~dng the pnysica propenles of matter. atom c an0 mo ecu ar strLcr~re,norgan c nomenclar~re,cnemica rean ons an0 slolch omelry, and solLtlon chem stry 3-h c ass perfod, 12-weeksession lnc ming one revlew per od and one test period, Analytical Chemistry: Introduces the fundamental methods of chemical analysis with a focus on the reactions and calculations ~~~~
~
~~
~
~
~.~
~~~~~~
~
~
~
~
reouired oravimetric and volumetric methods. ~~,~ ~~- Acid-base. orecioi-tat on, complexar on, and oxloat.on-red~cton equl br a are d scussed. Potentometry and speclroscopy are presenteo. 3-h c ass per ods. 12-weeusesslon nc ~dmgone rev ew period and one test period. ~~o~
~
~~
~
~~
~
~
~~
~~
7
Level II Basic Chemistry II: Discussion includes an introduction to organic chemistry, structure and nomemclature, and a survey of the inorganic phosphate industry. 3-h class period, 12-weeksession including one review period and one test period. Instrumental Analysis: Adiscussion of the fundamental principles of instrumental analysis including spectrophotometry,chromatograohv. , ,. and electrochemical methods. 3.n class per od, 12-weeksesslon nc mng one review perm and one test per 00. Computer Workshop: Participants are introduced to computer hardware, operating systems, software, and specific applications for Rhbne-Poulenc's plant and laboratory computer system. 3-h class period. 12-weeksession including one review period and +one test period. ~
~
~~
~
~~~
Volume 70 Number 12 December 1993
1011
Table 3. Evaluative Test Results for Participants in ln-House Training Program Descriptive Test of Language Skills: Reading Comprehension Possible Smre Mean Swre Range Median InterpretationISucce~s Mean Percentile Rank Range Median percentile Rank InterpretationISuccess
45 28.3 12-43 28 >30 41.6 3-98 31 >45
Table 4. Success of ln-House Training Program Participants in 1991 Total Number of Original Participants
15
Number of Original Participants Currently Employed at Rhbne-Poulenc
15
Number of Original Participants Remaining in QAlOC Laboratory
12
Number of Original Participants Required to Complete LEVEL I I Training
8
Number of Original Participants Who Completed LEVEL
I I Training
10
Number of Promotions
3
Number of New Hires Who Completed LEVEL I1Training
2
Descriptive Test of Mathematics Skills: Arithmetic Skills
N
15 35 26 26 14-35 >25
Possible Score Mean Median Range InterpretationlSuccess GSU Algebra Skills Test
N
15
Possible Score Mean Median Range InterpretationlSuccess
>I8
Orleans-Hanna Alaebra Proanosis Test Possible Swre Mean Median Range InterpretationlSuccess
58 22.6 22 9-56 S O
The math tests included the Orleans-Hanna Algebra Prognosis Test puhlished by Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, the Arithmetic Skills Test which is part of the Descriptive Tests of Mathematics Skills of the College Board, and the GSU Algebra Skills test.' The GSU test is used to evaluate all undergraduate students with renards to the University's general education algebra proficiency requirement. The language skills test used was the Reading Com~rehensionExam. Dart of the Descriotive Test of Laneuaee k i l l s of the college Board. Table 3 includes the res;ltsk the evaluative tests. I t was apparent from the exam results that the participants' reading and math skills were arrayed in a bimodal distribution. The faculty and professional staff of RhGne-Poulenc decided not to split the participants into groups according to test results but to begin the Basic Math Workshop with the complete cohort. The Basic Math Workshop reviewed arithmetic operations, preparing participants for the Algebra Workshop. One aim of the training profiram was to treat each participant in a fair and equitable manner creating a feelinaof"we're all in I t was felt that any this together" among the preliminary divisions would diminish the likelihood of developing such camaraderie. The bimodal distribution of
-
1012
Journal of Chemical Education
-
math skills did express itself in the Algebra Workshop and the participants were divided "naturally" into two cohorts. Cohort I successfully completed the Algebra Workshop on the first attempt and continued with the LEVEL I training oromam. Cohort I1 did not succesfullv comolete the Aleeba'workshoPon their first attempt al;d repeated t h e ~ l & bra Worksho~,befibre vroceedinr! to comvlete the LI
