The Future of Quality Graduate Research
If a science is to evolve and grow, its practitioners must continually build upon previous facts and theories to produce a new vision of that science. The ultimate essence of science is research; quality scientists must understand a t a very primordial level what it means to "do research." But how do voune scientists obtain experience in research? The question , hils historirally hased answers, but in the near future theanswers ma\. be markedls different. Kronomic pressures together withlogistical r m k a i n ~may ~ ; bring ubout unavoidahlr chances in [he rurrent system of providing research experience for young scientists which codd havefar-reaching philos o ~ h i c aimplications. l All teachers of chemistry, as well as the general public, should be concerned with the future and quality of the research environment in this countrv. The continual evolution of chemistry is clearly dependent on the quality of research conducted by its practitioners-the products of our curricula. In addition, the quality of basic scientific research has large economic. social. and political consequences. Thus, it is not surprising thatconsiderable apprehension exists in this countrv over the quality of future American science. The quality of researchk important in the instruction of the next generation of scientists (and non-scientists) as well as for the continual growth of science itself. Many university scientists feel that students only learn science when they do research, an attitude which often leads to neglect in the instruction of persons who do not plan to be scientists, but whose attitudes, as citizens and policymakers, will affect support for science and research. Thus, in chemistrv. research is an inteeral part of instruction almost from the v& start of a studentg career. I t is essential that we consider carefully how scientists are to he educated, and how non-scientists should be taught and informed about science. The education of non-science students has been discussed on this page several times before. This discussion concerns the education of scientists to do research. Most of the research in this country is done in universities. Since Sputnik in 1957, i t has been government policy to support research in universities because originally only in unibersities could he found the numbers of able scientists who could conduct hasic research on so large a projected scale. Even today, though research in government laboratories and facilities has grown enormously, about 60% of the federal funds expended for basic research are still spent in universities. Declining enrollments, the availability of fewer appointments to university faculties, and the observation that fewer students are preparing for research careers are cause for concern about the prospects for the quality and quantity of basic research in the universities. Since most of our basic research is done in universities, these facts are also cause for apprehension about the general prospects for science in our country. Thus, it is natural to question whether universities can accommodate more scientists on their faculties in the face of decreasing enrollments and the concomitant economic pressures, and whether they can continue to provide the unique blend of graduate instruction and research which are essential to prepare young scientists of the quality necessary for the future.
..
~~~
~
~
Taken as a whole, university research facilities are stretched to their maximum, and in many instances they have deteriorated to unacceptably low levels. It is difficult to imagine that historical remedies can be applied with success. In its August 1980 report on research personnel, the National Commission on Research suggested, as one possibility for improving the quidi[y o i research, that advanced ~nstrurrionin some areas ,, scienre i could be uiierrd in tederally-iunded lahorara&s. The idcu is attractive hc~uusei t permits eflicienr use d a d wnced equipmrnr which, in many universitiei, is eir her non-existent or badly out-of-date. There are some experiments-even in chemistry-which require a financial commitment too large to be borne by any but the most affluent universities; even such universities could not he expected to support all experimental research of this kind in every scientific field. The National Science Foundation has addressed the problem of accessibility of modern instrumentation by establishing regional instrumentation centers at selected universities, the facilities of which are available to users from other institutions. Thus, it is now possible for young scientists studying a t an institution which lacks certain major items of eouinment to arrange to make their measurements on . equipment at federally-funded luboratories ur at a university which has a federally-funded instrumentatinn center. Givcn this tact. 11 is logical toask why these studentsshould not rewivr their advanced degrees from m e uf' rhesc {federallyfunded, iarilities. The route to an advanced degree inwl\,ing two amdcmic institutions is viahle and has in iact been used numerigus times under a variet). of coaditiuns, eg., the resrarch super\,isor who moves to another inititulion and takes his stude& him. This route reauires the acquiescence -~ ~ with . of two like-minded (even though independent) entities. On the other hand. the marriaee of a federallv-funded laboratory and an academic institution has much of which to be wary. F& examnle. . . it is difficult to imagine establishing the open atmosphere necessary to provide-students with agualiti initial research experience in an environment dominated by attitudes which lead to the application of unthinking regulations for the purposes of accountability such as those contained in the OMB Circular A-21 which demand wasteful and meaningless work-load documentation. It is apparent that many persons do not understand the very nature of research and the im~ossibilityof cost-accounting the supervision of an individual's time with respect to supervision of student research, teaching, and his personal research efforts. We cannot be too sanguine that those who have overregulated the academic endeavor in the past will he sensitive to those nuances in the future. There is little doubt that a reasonably logical scenario involves offering the research associated with advanced degree work, and accordingly the granting of advanced degrees, to the facilities which are currently the best equipped-the federally-funded-laboratories. The suggestion has obvious merit on the grounds of efficiency and expediency in this day of tight budgets. We must he prepared, however, to decide whether research and graduate education will-or should be-expressed in individual terms or on the basis of the availahility of equipment. If we decide on the latter course of action, how will we devise procedures for administering research in an unobtrusive and oon-interfering manner? JJL
.
~~~~
~
Volume 57. Number 12, December 1980 1 835
