Local Deviations from National Standards in the Professional Preparation of Chemists Roger R. Festal and Jeffrey M. Preisack Northeast Missouri State University, Kirksville, MO 63501 The - - - ~American ~-~Chemical Societv (ACS) . . Committee on Professional Training is the nationil arbiter of standards for the training of professional chemists. The Committee on Professional Training (CPT) has amission mandated by the Federal Charter manted to the ACS in 1937, wherebv the Society shall imp;ove ". . . the qualifications and usefdness of chemists through high standards of professional ethics, education, and attainments." The CPT has existed as a discrete body of the ACS for more than 50 years, and its principal objective is the enforcement of high standards of chemical education. Its principal vehicle of attaining this goal is the approval of chemistry departments that adopt the national standards published by the Committee. Many institutions of hieher learnine committed t o awardine a chemistry degree o f h u e seek aiisting on the prestigious"^^^ List of An~rovedSchools". A chemistrv degree from an ACSapprobed college and certified to the Society is the most robust credential that a graduatinn senior resents for employment or admission t o graduat'study. The American Institute of Chemists tAIC) maintains a Code of Ethics, the national norm of professional behavior expected of those who practice the profession of chemistry. The -~~AI(? isa nrofessionol association in contrast to the ACS. which is a scientific and educational organization. As such; the AIC focuses on the chemist as a nrofessioual nractitioner; the emphasis here shifts to the qkality of practice rather than on the nre~arationof the nractitioner. However, the Institute recognizes that professional standards are inculcated in rising chemists durine their undergraduate and graduate stud&. The professors;of course, arethe front-line role models, and students'exposure topn~fessionalhehavior in arenas such as collegiality, mutuality or fellowship, honor. and service indeed shape the ethical construct of the future chemist. His or her abilitv to fulfill the exnectarions articulated in the AIC Code 2 Ethics and to ieflect the values exnected of anv educated nrofessionalin societv is determ k e d largely in tandem wiih the academic curr~culumand the professional environment in which it is experienced. This essay focuses on two local deviations from the ACS academic standards and from the AIC ethical norms: "sudden-death" exit examinations and honors programs. Neither of thesevariations is grounded in the history and traditimof rhcmical in the United States. The ahiiitv of - - - - - ~education ~ ~ ~ "sudden-death" examinatio& to block the conferral 0; an otherwise earned degree is ethically questionable and, therefore, abusive of academic freedom. Honors programs bewilder students and have the potential to obfuscate real differences in professional competency among graduating chemists. The ACS standards do not mandate a comprehensive examination as an integral part of an approved undergraduate program. Students awarded the BS degree from an approved school are "certified" to the Society upon completion of the ACS curriculum. They are, in effect, recognized as profes~
~
~
~
~~~~
' Author to whom communicationsshould be addressed
sional chemists. The AIC has as its sole criterion for election the attainment of the baccalaureatein chemistry from aduly accredited institution acceptable to the Institute. Elevation to the status of Fellow in the AIC requires 10 years of progressive achievement as a practitioner of the profession. Unlike attainment of the equivalent status in the Royal Society of Chemistry, no examination is required. The ACS Examinations Institute produces a catalog of disciplinary exams for all levels and in each specialty of chemistry. These are valuable tools for measuring student progress after completion of specific courses, for determining placement in the undergraduate curriculum upon entry and as the student progresses, and for evaluating program and instructional effectiveness. The ACS does not produce a comprehensive "exit" examination for administration a t the comnletion of the undergraduate o r o m . The Educational Testing Service, a private corporaton in Princeton, New Jersev. administers the Graduate Record Examination and advanced tests in most undergraduate diwplines, including chemistrv. The"GHE chemistrv exam" is produced tw aualified pro>essionals and is designed as graduate-school placement instrument. I t is not designed as a comprehensive "exit"examination to be administered at the completion of a chemistry~-~ degree program. Neither the ACS nor the AIC recognizes an examination as a capstone requirement of an undergraduate chemistry degree or as a "sudden-death" arbiter if whether a student receives a deeree and becomes a professional chemist. Locally generated comprehensive examinations are likewise reiected hv the national chemistrv establishment. These dis~ositionsreflect revisions in higher education effected approximately 20 years ago. ~ u r i n g i h e19507s,colleges and universities responded to inundation by World War 11and Korean War veterans who earned degrees with support from the GI Bill. At the same time, demographers siynaled the onslaught of the progeny of these veterans, the "baby boom" generation. Liberal arts curricula were revised and general academic standards were stiffened. In an effort to "enrich" the degree programs, core requirements were all hut set in stone, and the elective was indeed a vanishing species. Someoftheearlveffortsin thisarena (e.g., thesaint Michael's Plan uf 19541were hailed as innovative and timel,, and received broad national attention. But within 15 years, the "bugs" in these programs had become obvious and the needs and interests of the first wave of "baby boom" students in the middle 1960's hastened an aggiornamento of American undergraduate education. Among the principal difficulties articulated during the late 1960's was the nroblem with comnrehensive examinations administered a t the end of theAdegreeprograms as "sudden-death" determinations of degree qualification. Of course, certain licensed professions required and still require qualifying examinations for credentialling, hut these tests are administered after the degree has been received and are generally national exams developed and administered by the professional association of the specialty. The exams to which college seniors were subjected were most often locally gener-
.
u
a
-
Volume 67
Number 2
February 1990
119
ated and less than objective. The very subjectivity of the exams and the reciprocal subjectivity of those writing and grading the exams-emerged as a s&us ethical issue on campuses across the country. Most professional associations declined to oroduce a standardized.. ohiective. nationallv normed or cr'iterionlreferenced exam and, withdut the support of the disciplinary societies, the tradition of "suddendeath" exit examinations had been abandoned by the early 1970's. This scenario was verv true in chemistrv. If the ACS and AIC do not produce and do not recognize exit examinations as part of undergraduate professional preparation,and if the Educational Testing ~erGicedoesnot permit the GHE chemistry exam to be so used, how can such an exam become a deviation from the national standards? Parallel with the curricular reforms in higher education was a heightened sensitivity to academic freedom. Today, the ACS recognizes this sacred privilege in CPT-approved institutions hv encouraeine "experiments with the content of the and style of ~ a ~ h i n ~ " . it~ is ~ the ~ u prerogative s , individual ~rofessorto determine the requirements for the successful completion of the specific coukes that he or she teaches. Consider this scenario. The professor of a concluding course in an ACS-approved curriculum (a course traditionally taken by students during the senior year) institutes as a requirement of the course the completion of a locally generated comprehensive examination beyond the specific Eourse content and a t an arbitrarilv determined level of performance. If the course is a required course, the students mav not oass the course (and not receive the decree) - if thev do not pass the comprehensive examination a t the prescribed performance level. The abuses inherent in this deviation are several. First, the invocation of academic freedom as the a~orobationfor infusing a "sudden-death" exit exam into the k ~ - a p p r o v e d curriculum raises moral and ethical auestions. Second. this deviation has the potential to block-the conferring of the baccalaureate degree upon students who have otherwise successfully completed all of the ACS requirements for the degree. The ramifications of this action, if duly protested to the Society, may jeopardize the university's ACS approval. Third, the use of the Educational Testing Service's GRE chemistry exam for this purpose is an infringement of the contractual agreement between the university or the department and the cor~oration.Leeal action and subseauent neeative publicity may result. Fourth, locally generated examinations are subjectively prepared and sut~jrctivelygraded. A system whereby the chairperson or another designated professor coordinates "double-hlind"administration and grading may diminish bias. But if the author of an exam question accepts only one mechanism or explanation as correct, nothing has been accomplished by the codingand confidentiality. Fifth, locally generated exams are usually essaylprohlem exams. and the oroblems selected are usuallv auite comnrehensive and mukifaceted. In industry and irahuate scdool, chemists are asked to solve problems by tapping the wealth of resources available through chemical information systems. The "closed-book" exam at the exit level presents a distorted perspective on how chemists solve real-world problems. A lighthearted yet bewildering deviation from standard credentialling is the so-called "honors" p r o g m offered by some universities. Programsof this nature have been reported primarily hy larger institutions and seldom by liberal arts colleees. "Honors" tracks in eeneral a m e a r to address a perciived need to challenge '';gifted" st;hents further and orovide another trinket for those who collect such artifacts. some schools offer honors sections of freshman and sophomore courses such as general chemistry and organic chemistry, but among chemistry majors the distinction is soon lost as they pass t o higher pursuits such as physical and inorganic chemistry. At the upper level, chemistry majors qualify for "honors" by completing an undergraduate research project, ~~~~
120
~~~~
Journal of Chemical Education
-
scoring at an arbitrarily determined performance level on a qualifying grade . . . examination, andlor achieving a specific . point average in the major and in generalWhile "honors" programs cannot be construed as abusive (all reported programs are optional), they are unnecessary and demeaning. First, the undergraduate college is not a hieh school. Admission to an institution of hieher education is an acknowledgement of honorable achievement in secondarv school. The idea of an honors undereraduate oroeram is . meaningless in the more selective institutions, and this perhaps explains why few liberal arts colleges have such tracks in place. Second, there is no established basis for participation in an honors program in chemistry. Unlike the British system of distinction in degrees, the American chemistry establishment recognizes the successful completion of the baccalaureate as the sole credential for entry into the professional ranks. Performance as recorded on the university transcript may be used by employers and by graduate admissions committees as an indicator of potential or as a selection coordinate in competitive placement. However, it is unlikelythat agrade of A in an "honors" freshmanchemistrv course better positions an applicant with a 3.75 GPA whencompetingwitha peer holdinnRthesameGPA and anA in a standard freshman chemistry course. Both chemists may have achieved at commendable levels in the more rigorous upper level courses such as physical chemistry where the chemi.it~-maioruooulation nrohibits artificial sectionine. Third, t i e adpeai df such piograms appears to be rather limited. When presented with the option of following an honors track to an ACS-certified degree, students in universities in Maine, Connecticut, and Missouri replied "Why bother?" after examining the requirements of the honors programs. Abuses that violate the AIC Code of Ethics are unfortunately common. Certainly, the problems described in association~withsurreptitious-exit &ams undermine the ethical norms and can devastate four years of development of an ethical construct in the students. Nothing is more sinister than disastrous role-modeling. The unwillingness of professors to respond to the needs of the communitv. - . a elarinelack " of fellowship and collegiality among the faculty, policies that lead students to question academic and professional fairness, and unwillingness to relate to students as individuals emasculate the academic standards, compromise the ethical norms, and violate the spirit and intent i f both. The ACS academic standards and the AIC ethical norms are living, evolving guidelines. Neither is set in stone and both are subject to refinement. For example, the ACS curriculum mandates physical chemistry as a prerequisite for all advanced courses. This is an artifact of the chemistry curriculum reforms of thelate 1950's and early 1960's in which the principal collaborators were physical chemists. Dudlev Her=on, speaking a t the 1978 ~ c ~ a s t Conference er on-"~ew Directions in the Chemistry Curriculum", asked his audience to imagine what the chemistry curriculum would be like today if organic chemists had been the movers behind the post-Sputnik reforms. Yet, in the most recently published ACS guidelines, the CPT allows that "a biochemistry course that uses quantitative concepts involving kinetics, thermodynamics, solution properties of macromolecules, and that has organic but not uh~sicalchemistrvas a ~rereauisitemav be appropriate for chemistry majors in approved programs.;' Such considerations, if successfully implemented, may shape the direction of future professional training. The AIC Code of Ethics may be enriched in the future by ethical challenges emerging from the new fields of genetic engineering and molecular biology. As chemists become more involved in these enterprises as practitioners of the central science-and as disciplinary boundaries become more obscure-issues that were once in the domain of the biomedical sciences will impact directly on the chemist as a professional.
-
-
-
