Chemical Education in American Institutions W. A. NOYES, JR. University of Rochester, Rochester. New York
A
DEPARTxENT Of is collection of individuals with a buildiug.in which to teach and to do research, but the character of a department-its soul perhaps, that something which determines whether your boy should go there-cannot be measured by numbers, by floor space, or by published articles. &rely should one man be either blamed or praised for success or failure, although his ability to choose men is of unquestioned importance, for a department is part of an institution and the general reputation of the institution has a great bearing on ability to attract either good faculty members or good students. The department chairman
is not a glorified office boy. He is the goat. Frequently factors beyond the power of a department chairman determine the course of events. Budgets may be inadequate. Staff members with permanent tenure may have been on the scene when he arrived. Space may be inadequate and impossible to rectify in a period of shortages. A short visit xi11 suffice, however, to reveal whether a department is happy and whether it is operating as a team or as a collection of uncoordmated individuals. 4 successful chemistry department must have some able young men on the staff. Young men have new ideas; they are less hampered than older ones by extra-scientific calls on their time, committee work, administrative duties, and advising students. They will be instrumental in maintaining if not in creab ing a research atmosphere and they will, in many instances, also do the best teaching. All of which implies a sound policy with regard to promotion, one which looks forward to the future. There are three general bases for promotion, aside from factors related to department size and budget: teaching ability, research, and administrative ability. Of these three by far the most difficult to evaluate ohjectively is teaching ability. Mere popularity with students is not a safe guide. Neither is generally accepted clarity of presentation. Stimulation to thought rather than imparting of ideas, no matter how carefully predigested, is important in good teaching. The students must not be anesthetized into abject acceptance of the 71
72
divine word of the teacher. However, even if a good teacher has been chosen, what guarantee is there that he will still be one twenty or thirty years from now? Will he still be telling the same jokes or will his knowledge of science have kept abreast of the times? The man who has so little interest in chemistry that he will not spend some of his spare time with it is not apt to remain an inspiring teacher very long. Research ability and teaching ability are not always found in the same individual, but the combination can be found. Once found, such an individual deserves promotion, he should be allowed to teach and do research and be freed of the in6nite drudgery which has become a necessary hut not a very essential part of our academic system. It is easier to obtain an objective estimate of research ability. Opinions of colleagues in other institutions should be sought. Such opinions may mean little for the first few years, but by the time one is ready for an associate or full professorship one should have the heginnings of a substantial research reputation. This reputation must he based mainly on the work the man has done himself, but he should also have begun to attract graduate students. This brings up another point in successfuldepartmental administration. Large departments may be strong in several fields. Smaller departments must choose, but a good department cannot be too narrow. Let us say that a t least two of the major fields of chemistry must be well represented. The research students must , not work with one or two faculty members. Either the staff quality is too low or the staff will he unhappy if that is the case. One faculty member may have a bigger reputation than the others but he should not dominate the research program. Universities must continue to be places where men are free to follow research leads whether or not they fit into a preconceived scheme and the graduate students must be free to work with any faculty member, regardless of rank, who has demonstrated his ability to do and to direct research. It takes several years to determine whether a man's research ability warrants promotion to permanent tenure. Too few young faculty members realize that they must develop fields of their own. Minor extensions of work started under other investigators as graduate students or as post-doctoral fellows may add to the reputation of the older man, but will not show enough originality to warrant a life appointment. Such appointments must be made with great care. It may be argued that one should never promote a faculty member for administrative ahility only. Perhaps that is tme, hut good administrators are rare and they are needed in academic circles. The time of able teachers and scientists is too valuable to be wasted on details. Occasionally, it is wise to promote a man with a view to his being eventually a department chairman, a dean, or even a college president. The younger men of a department should be given responsibilities sufficient to demonstrate which types of ability they possess and administrative ability must he considered in making some promotions.
JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL EDUCATION
The foregoing may he summarized by stating that young men should be carefully chosen; they should he given definite responsiblities and much freedom to develop their careers. They should be promoted as soon as their abilities have been proved, but not sooner, and due regard to age distribution must be given to the end that the department will always have young men in it. A department chairman should be severely censured if he does not pay a great deal of attention to the develop ment of the young men in his department. So far we have said little ahout teachmg. With a good faculty and good students this problem solves itself almost automatically. Methods should, of course, be studied and changed and experimented with. Whenever a department feels perfectly satisfied with its system the department chairman and a t least half the staff should be fired. Some teaching methods require a lot of labor and give precious little return in useful pedagogy. There should be as much personal contact as possible between faculty members, graduate assistants, and students. Do grading notebooks, elaborate methods of marking laboratory work, and more quiz sections really teach the student anything7 If not, abollish them and spend the time saved either in talking to students personally or in doing research. It must not be forgotten that better graduate students often do a better job of teaching than faculty members, just because there is more chance for real personal discussion with them. A w o ~ d about graduate work is also necessary. This is the one teaching level in the United States where student and faculty members have the proper relationship for good teaching. Even this is changing and many graduate schools are beginning to believe that formal classes and courses are a good substitute for pedagogy. The ideal graduate school would be one where there are no courses, just seminars and discussion groups, where at least a quarter of a student's time in the first year is devoted to research and where by the third year he does nothing but reading and research. Unfortunately this ideal cannot be reached. Most entering graduate students are not well trained in one or more of the standard fields of chemistry, others do not know how to use languages (either English or foreign), still others have inadequate training in physics, mathematics, vr biology. In other words, the graduate school now feels called upon to complete undergraduate training and the situation will get worse if undergraduate colleges increase requirements of general courses desikned to overcome the shortcomings of the secondary school. The situation is becoming serious. The entering graduate student should receive very early a problem he can call his own and course work should he reduced to the absolute minimum necessary to guarantee that he knows the tools of the trade. He should learn much by personal reading and discussion. Finally, a long drawn-out course for the Ph.D. is deadening. The student should usually get through in three years and then get a job. He doesn't need to stop
FEBRUARY, 1948
learning when he has a degree, and the sooner he begins to stand on his own feet, once he has had basic training in research, the better off he will be if he is really a good man. This brings us to the choice of students. The earlier undergraduates can be discouraged from studying chemistry after the establishment of a reasonable doubt concerning their abilities, the easier it is for them to enter other fields successfully. Generally speaking, students who get beyond the sophomore year should have demonstrated ability and should he practically certain to graduate. The chemistry course should almost be an honors course. Only the best undergraduates should do graduate work and grades are not an infallible basis for selection. A student with high grades may not have any originality and initiative and sometimes his personality is such that success in any endeavor would be problematical. Less frequently, but occasionally, a man with low grades may have that spark which characterizes a real research man. Personal judgment counts a great deal, .hut the weeding out process for graduate students must be far more severe than for undergraduates. It cannot
73
be based mainly on grades in c o k e s or in examinations hut must include an estimate of the man. A word concerning personality is in order. Too many graduate students lack social graces and tend to be recluses. Not that they shouldn't work long hours; they must be hterested enough in chemistry to want to. But their entire social life should not be confined to the walls of the laboratory. There is room for an occasional "screwball" in chemistry providing he is a real genius, but no premium should be placed on being a screwball. A good personality and good adjustment to one's surroundings make success easier and l i e a whole lot more pleasant. This has been more the presentation of a philosophy than the description of a department, but one must have certain ideals and strive toward them, leaving to others the verdict as to how well those ideals have been attained. The summary of the philosophy is simple: choose a good staff and trust it, choose the best students and don't encourage .the others. Eliminate purely formal instruction as far as size of staff andfacilities permit. Is this policy ruthless? Perhaps, but it may be the kindest one in the end.
