Chemical Education Today
ACS Presidential Election
Statement on Education—Education at the Core by Alvin L. Kwiram
reaches that goal and the way in which the students participate in that process can be worlds apart depending precisely on how carefully the mentor thinks about his/her mentoring role. But there are other issues. When do our academic leaders develop their sense of the intellectual history of our discipline? Where do they learn the skills for their new role as program managers and “entrepreneurs” who have to hire personnel, meet payroll, and manage budgets? Where should they learn leadership skills? Where are they provided guidance on how to help a diverse group of students each realize his or her fullest potential? These and other critical topics are either addressed sporadically at most institutions or not at all. Fortunately, our young faculty members are smart and pick up much of the most critical information on the job. But is that the best we can do for them? In essence, we are asking our freshly minted graduate to function as the head of a serious new start-up company but without the appropriate training or any of the key support staff needed to handle all the multifaceted demands. How can we better prepare them for this demanding job? Recent studies of doctoral education have identified a number of related problems that deserve attention (2), but little emphasis has been given to this issue (3). It is time. If we gave more thought to the critical role of new faculty, and what they need to know when they begin their academic careers, perhaps we could help empower the next generation of mentors and thereby enrich the experience of all the future generations of students. For a fuller discussion of this issue see http://depts.washington.edu/or/kwiram. Literature Cited 1. At http://chemistry.org click successively on Policy Makers, Issues, Policy Statements, and White Paper on Education (accessed June 2002). 2. See http://www.grad.washington.edu/envision/resources/ studies.html. See also the Carnegie Initiative on the Doctorate at http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/CID (accessed June 2002). 3. A step in this direction is represented by the Preparing Future Faculty initiative first sponsored by the Pew Charitable Trust and more recently supported by NSF.
Alvin L. Kwiram is Vice Provost for Research Emeritus and Professor of Chemistry at the University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195;
[email protected]; http:// depts.washington.edu/or/kwiram.
JChemEd.chem.wisc.edu • Vol. 79 No. 9 September 2002 • Journal of Chemical Education
1037
photo University of Washington Health Sciences
Public attention is focused more intensely on the educational enterprise today than in any period in recent memory. This emphasis involves not only K–12, but also undergraduate education, and more recently graduate education as well. We agonize over the declining performance of our students in middle and high school. Test scores of U.S. students are routinely below those of students from most other nations. Employers, as well as college faculty members, complain about the inadequate preparation of high school graduates. And some argue that problems exist at the college level as well. Fortunately, serious efforts are underway to address these issues at both the federal and Society level. I strongly support the positions outlined in SOCED’s Science Education Policy Document (1). I believe that existing programs should be expanded to include improved pre-service curricula for teachers-in-training, more undergraduate research experience, and efforts to increase the diversity of our undergraduate chemistry majors. However, in this short commentary, I wish to focus on a different topic, related to an aspect of graduate education that currently receives very little systematic attention in most Ph.D. programs. I believe we must do more to prepare the next generation of those who shape the intellectual trajectory of our disciplines (2). It is remarkable that in our system of graduate education, which is the envy of the world in terms of research training, we spend virtually no time preparing those students headed toward teaching careers for their role as mentors (especially for those in research universities). By contrast, our Ph.D. graduates who go into industry have the benefit of beginning as understudies to more seasoned managers who can provide mentoring. Many established companies also provide extensive management and related training courses. The new assistant professor, however, is expected to function as a successful “CEO” from the very first day on the job. To be sure, only a small fraction of Ph.D.s will become faculty at research universities, but their impact is enormous and affects all the undergraduate, graduate, and postdoctoral students they train and, in turn, affects the next generation of teachers. What are some of the issues that a new faculty member should learn about before becoming an independent leader in the academic setting? First is the gravity of their professional role as teacher. Second is the dual role of “teaching” students while directing their “research”. This critical issue, in particular, is often neglected. How much care do most research supervisors take in tailoring their research projects as a deliberate means of developing the creativity and talents of the students? Or are students sometimes seen as a pair of hands to help generate the next publication and the next grant? The goal of advancing the frontiers of knowledge does not need to change, but the means by which one
