IW=*MÎ^=I^ Electronic publishing Your article on electronic publishing was quite fascinating (C&EN, May 18, page 10). It seems to me that the key aspect of electronic publishing is archiving. If a paper copy is permanently available in libraries, even if it is only available some time after electronic publication, then the article is a valid contribution to the literature. Otherwise it is little more than a press release. In the course of researching a number of books, I have never failed to obtain a copy of an article in a conventional journal. Recent experience with electronic products has been discouraging. NMR data that was to be kept "forever" became unavailable a few years later after a software upgrade. Machinereadable files of important documents in our organization apparently cannot be found several years after they have been finalized. Many of us have had occasion to consult, for example, Berichte from a century ago. How many web-published articles will still be available 100 years hence? None at all, I would suggest. George Lunn Baltimore, Mel.
Diverse knowledge base Tamara Walkers letter about her experiences in a nondiverse graduate program evoked a Hood of personal memories (C&EN, June 29, page 8). I obtained masters and Ph.D. degrees from a rapidly expanding biochemistry department. The department was populated with fresh, relatively young professors, most of whom believed and practiced the philosophy of single-subject specialization. I was encouraged by many of these shavetails to limit my classwork to biochemistry. Fortunately, this did not happen, an outcome for which I cannot claim responsibility. My graduate adviser, George Garner, forbade such action, a decision with which my peers and I did not agree at the time. But if it were not for the professional convictions, courage, and especially wisdom, of this "old-school" graduate adviser, my knowledge base would have been seriously handicapped; indeed, when all was said and done, this was his greatest gift to me. I simply do not believe that I could have recovered lost opportunities for knowledge in the hectic, time-limited environment of the business world. Anyone with aspirations beyond benchwork in business, academe, or government must have a diverse knowledge base. The reason is simple: Successful careers beyond the bench involve dealing with disparate groups of highly intelligent folks who have not specialized in your field, and you'd better have the wherewithal to discuss, understand, genuinely care about their needs, interests, and ideas beyond a rudimentary level. Blank looks of ignorance are a decidedly ineffective approach. Highly specialized people are good
4
AUGUST 17, 1998 C&EN
for only one thing—their specialty—and they cannot progress outside it. In her letter, Walker asks, "Wouldn't taking some business courses or computer science courses increase knowledge, skills, and marketability' in the workplace?" Damn right—and throw in a host of other courses to boot. Michael Williams President, Horizon Laboratories Inc. Columbia, Mo.
Regulating DOE I found the article "Who will regulate DOE?" quite interesting (C&EN, June 29, page 23). The International Chemical Workers Union Council of the United Food & Commercial Workers International Union (ICWUC/UFCW) has represented workers at a number of Department of Energy weapons facilities since the 1940s. This union and its members have watched and participated in the changes that these facilities have gone through, from the secrecy days of the Manhattan Project, through the continuing secrecy years of the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), into the early years of DOE and, at last, into the much more open years beginning with Admiral Watkins and continuing through the first five years of the Clinton Administration. Throughout all those changes, one thing remained a fixture: the self-regulation of worker health and safety without any outside controls, a concept that was abandoned decades ago in the mining, general industry, service, construction, maritime, and transportation sectors. Agency policies change with succeeding Administrations; thus, strong self-regulation under one Administration does not guarantee that the next will not retreat to the old status quo of secrecy, denial, and reluctance to correct hazards. It has been clear to us that external regulation of worker health and safety at these facilities is long overdue. That was my stance as a member of the National Academy of Public Administration panel that recommended a shift to external regulation; it remains so now. Of course, the Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) would need to update its radiation standard to avoid decreasing protection for workers in DOE facilities but, if the funds for regulation by OSHA are provided, there is no reason why OSHA should not have that function. There is a real risk that, as the agency paying for the cleanup work, the budgetary limits imposed by Congress could pressure DOE (as regulator) to be less objective in identifying hazards and optimum control measures than would an outside regulator. In addition, given the past history of AEC and DOE, the public and workers fear that cleanup will not be done properly and safely, as well as fearing that cost considerations and the remaining DOE defense mission will
take precedence over environmental and worker protections. An external regulator will help to show the public that DOE is committed to conducting activities at these sites in a way that does not give lip service to protection. DOE needs to retain responsibility for ensuring that contractors follow safety and health provisions on the sites by enforcing contract provisions. Thus, both OSHA and DOE must have sufficient funding to properly perform these roles. As for the costs of compliance, those are difficult to predict. However, OSHA has shown great flexibility in working with companies and unions to help limit compliance costs while ensuring worker protection. ICWUC President Frank D. Martino has urged DOE and the Department of Labor to quickly come to an agreement to move forward on external regulation of all DOE weapons facilities with the same sense of urgency that existed under former Energy Secretary Hazel R. O'Leary and Tara O'Toole, former DOE assistant secretary for environment, safety, and health. ICWUC has pledged to continue to work with both agencies to see that our members and all workers at these sites, the public, and the environment are protected. It is in the best interests of workers at DOE weapons facilities, as well as the contractors who run, maintain, and perform other activities at those facilities, that DOE and Libor proceed toward the external regulation by OSHA of all aspects of worker health and safety. This needs to occur with all possible speed, as it is likely that the window of opportunity will begin to close the nearer we come to the presidential election of 2000. The time is now for DOE and Libor, as well as Congress (which must provide the funding), to move forward. Michael Sprinker Director ICWUC Health & Safety Department
Oldest DOD labs Congratulations to the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) on its 75th anniversary (C&EN, June 29, page 22). NRL certainly has ample reason to be proud of a rich and productive heritage as a vital part of our nation's defense. However, NRL is not the oldest Department of Defense laboratory. I believe that title is claimed by our Air Force Research Liboratory's (AFRL's) Materials & Manufacturing Directorate, and shared with the Air Vehicles, Human Effectiveness, Sensors, and Propulsions Directorates of AFRL at WrightPatterson Air Force Base near Dayton, Ohio. We were created as the Airplane Engineering Department at old McCook Field in Dayton in 1917 by the Army Signal Corps to perform all technical and experimental work on aircraft. We celebrated our 80th anniversary last year at the Engineers Club of Dayton, start-
m=ÉHri=4=^i ed by Orville Wright, Charles Kettering, and Col. Edward Deeds in 191 i. The functions at McCook Field moved in 192"7 to what is today Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. The Airplane Fngineering Department evolved into the Aeronautical Systems Center (acquisition o f new aircraft) and AFRL, the sister lab to NRL and the Army Research Laboratory. Together, these make up the in-house technology base for DOD. Wade Adams Chief Scientist Materials & Manufacturing Directorate AFRL
Employment statistics Your editorial "Help Wanted," w h i c h I read w i t h great interest, struck me as very timely (C&HN, July 2 " \ page 5). Perhaps the age distribution among emp l o y e d chemists and u n e m p l o y e d ones should be looked at more closely. According to the article, "campus recruiting has been buoyant." This translates: young chemists. Has the employment status o f chemists in their 50s been analyzed? These are the experienced ones w h o have lost their jobs to downsizing, reengineering, or whatever the latest euphemism happens to be. Quite possibly, their numbers are the ones skewing the employment statistics for chemists during this economic boom. 'Fhe impact o f temporary employees on the overall employment picture for chemists should also be studied. Since the boom of these agencies, chemical companies use them whenever the) can to avoid hiring permanent employees. I have seen many instances where these "temporary" employees have been kept in the same position for years. Fvidently, that position is important and it is not temporary to the company, yet it is not given permanent status. Nano Mardones Freehold NJ.
Science and religion I am disappointed to see resources o f the dimension of those of the National Academy of Sciences be invested in "hunting where the light is," rather than venturing into the darkness that protects the bogeys that haunt teachers when they approach the topic of evolution (C&FN, April 20, page 5). Citing recent media reports, at least half of what is taught on the first five days of the week is wiped out by what is taught on the sixth or seventh day. Fhe reverse is equally probable. Only three or four pages of NAS's 1 4()-page book "leaching about Involution and the Nature of Science" focus on this state of affairs. Bluntly p u t , controversy and conflict w i t h i n and between science and theology have increasingly disabled both entities during the 20th century. There has been unequaled rejection o f religion's shall and shall
nots, taboos, and beatitudes. Consequently, too many young people are being denied the inspiration, guidance, and comfort that religion provides. Fhe role o f science in our society has become equally bleak. Respect for its discipline and faith in its methods are at n e w lows. Fhe public is unbelievably gullible in financial, political, ethical, moral, and philosophical matters. Appreciation o f and respect for nature is far overshadowed by the ever more demanding technology. I say that science teachers are left on their o w n in dealing w i t h fundamental concepts and precepts that are the responsibility of both science and religion. All too often, their profession is portrayed as being incompetent and treated as a "whipping boy" for societal defects and dysfunctions that trace more directly to controversy between science and religion than to teacher incompetence. I wanted NAS to provide mutually satisfying answers to the questions that underlie the issues that separate science and religion— What is the origin and true nature of life? How7 can w e account for the evolution of the structures and functions of its myriad forms? What is the origin and the ultimate destiny of the immaterial attributes that add up to what it means to be alive, to be human? At best, I wanted NAS to create a level playing field where scientists and theologians could come together in a harmonious effort to answer these questions—a playing field where science teachers will no longer risk the slings and arrows that come w i t h being referees. I wanted reconciliation of the "givens" that underlie the conflict between science and religion. At one end is the "given" of perpetual motion within and between inanimate particles. In response to random interactions among inanimate forces, collisions cause these particles to break up and the fragments to reassemble to create new particles that have wonderfully advantageous properties, properties that are to account for the origin of life and the evolution of its myriad forms, functions, and immaterial attributes. At the opposing end is the "given" that there is something in the universe, equally eternal, equally infinite, that involves a conglomerate of chemistries whereby life arose and makes possible eventhing that living systems are or have been, everything that they can do, want to do, or become. Such a playing field is possible. A field where scientists and theologians gain equal footing by establishing the ground rule that life is to be treated as natures supreme phenomenon, infinite in its dimensions, deserving of utmost respect, and w o r t h y o f all efforts to comprehend. To serve as a sort of holding pattern, life and energy are to be seen as fellow travelers, literally, blood relatives, t w o distinct but interrelated entities that flow relentlessly from some creative source to a destiny that is beyond our ken. Both are impossible to isolate absent interac-
tion with matter, equally improbable to create anew or destroy. There is much promise in giving life a position equal to that of energy, equally subject to investigation, to development, to management. The concept supports precepts directed against societal defects and to the enhancement of empathy, creativity, inventiveness, emotional fulfillment, unselfishness, excellence in all human and humane pursuits. The current century has seen spectacular achievements in comprehending what energy is and what it can be made to do. Surely, life holds equal challenges as we enter the new millennium—challenges that are consistent with the dimensions of the resources that are invested in NAS. J o h n H. Woodburn Silver Spring Md.
Improving chemical literacy Matthew Bio's letter responding to the ongoing debate related to increasing chemistry literacy throughout our society suggests that merely changing the applications of chemistry (topics or content) included in beginning chemistry courses, from esoteric to those relevant to daily life, will better prepare citizens to be better analyzers of risk and overall better decisionmakers (C&FN, June 8, page 6). In our research related to enhancing inquiry processes among teachers and students, through formal chemistry instruction, we have discovered that many chemical educators have the misconception that they have reformed the approach to chemistry instruction merely by updating the content. That is, they equate content with teaching methods. Bios analysis continues this misconception. Designing chemistry content to make it more relevant continues to be important. Examples of this include both the high school level "Chemistry in the Community" materials developed through the American Chemical Society Division of Chemical Education and the University of California, Berkeley, beginning college MC2 materials still under development. At the August 1998 Biennial Chemical Education Conference in Waterloo, Ontario, we will be reporting on the results of several studies that address the role of inquiry in chemistry instruction; especially in instruction designed to prepare teachers to give greater emphasis to inquiry methodology as well as to the "levels of Inquiry Matrix" that we have developed as an outgrowth of this research effort. If chemistry (or science) literacy is to improve, the teaching approach as well as the content must be reformed. This will not happen if content and teaching methodology are not addressed with equal emphasis. Frank X. Sutman Temple University and Rowan University
AUGUST l"7, 1998 C&FN
5
