JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL EDUCATION
THE PROFESSIONAL TRAINING Or'CHEMISTS1 S. C. LINDZ University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota ..
INREPORTING
C
for the Committee on Professional Training, a large tribute is due our most diligent and efficient Secretary, Mr. Erle M. Billings, who has served continuously since this work was initiated in 1936. We are also greatly indebted to the Eastman Kodak Company for its generous contribution of Mr. Billmgs' time and for the quarters they have put a t our disposal. As you may know, this work was begun in 1936 by a special committee ofth' e Council under the leadership of the late Dr. Midgley. From this there resulted the present Committee, first under the chairmanship of Dr. Roger Adams. A survey was made of the curricula and facilities of about 800 departments of chemistry in the United States, from which a point just above the median for each requirement was recommended as a Presented before the Division of Chemical Education a t the 111th meeting of the American Chemical Society in Atlantic , City, April 14-18, 1947. Chairman of the Committee of the Council of the Amerioan Chemical Society on "Professional Training."
'3
minimum standard for approval. After adoption of the requirements by the Council, the Committee was instructed to proceed to ascertain which departments of chemistry satisfied these requirements as to faculty, curriculum, facilities, and administration. The Committee has been authorized-by the Council to make changes in the minimum requirements when deemed best, as long as the change or changes do not lower any of the minimum standards adopted by the Council. The survey was conducted by means of a questionnaire sent to each institution requesting it, of which there have been about 504. This was followed by visitation upon invitation from the President of each institution, but a t the expense of the Society. At first a few members of the Associations of Land-Grant Colleges and Urban Universities objected to the Society's visitation of their chemistry departments. This was because they did not fully understand the purpose of the program. Their objections were happily resolved when the Committee convinced the Associations that the pro-
AUGUST, 1§47
posed activities would be helpful rather than detrimental to chemistry within their institutions and that the Chemical Society was withim its rights in setting up standards of admission to its membership. It should not be forgotten that this is the basis of our operations rather than accrediting of departments per se. In recognition of this, each graduate who is accredited receives a certificate of eligibility to membership-full membership in two years after the bachelor's degree. Our Committee is greatly indebted to the Associates who have contributed time and energy to make the large number of visits and revisits (592 as of March 20,1947), as well as written and owl reports, that have been necessary. They performed their officesefficientlyand fairly and have rendered a real service to the American Chemical Society. A large share of the success of the entire program is due to the unselfish efforts of these able Associates who have served the Committee. The minimum requirements have been changed but little during the years they have been in effect. .Now that the Committee has completed the initial survey of all institutions that have sought approval (451) and has approved 141, one of which has two approved dkpartments, it may well have more time to consider desirable revisions in step with the development of our science and the changing conditions under which our institutions operate. The Committee has already taken cognizance of this necessity and a t its present meeting is considering whether the time requirement of quantitative analysis might be reduced owing to improved and more rapid techniques in that field. You may be interested in some of the problems that have confronted the Committee. One that has recurred with disturbing frequency has been the use of the calculus in instruction in physical chemistry. Many institutions with limited enrollment desire to combine in one class students of chemistry who have had calculus, and other students, usually preprofessional, who have not. The Committee has felt it necess@ryto insist on preparation in and practical use of the calculus in the course in physical chemistry. Also, the question of what constitutes an "advanced course" has presented some perplexities, particularly with reference to the laboratory work required. The division of time between qualitative and general chemistry has raised some questions, in answering which the Committee has been inclined to favor a broad latitude of departmental judgment. On the whole the Committee has tried to avoid "hair splitting" decisions and the intrusion of more than a minimum of personal judgment. Fortunately the minimum requirements adopted by the Council obviate the necessity of this in most cases and permit decisions on a factual basis. Undoubtedly the most important factor in instruction in chemistry is the faculty, which must be considered both as to quality and size. In the early stages the Committee did approve a few departments in small institutions with a two-man faculty where there was no
cave
371
doubt as to its quality. Gradually and quite reluctantly the Committee has become convinced that the minimum requirements cannot be given by only two men without violating the restrictions on overloading. Although there are a few notable instances of a faculty consisting of two young men-capable, vigorous, and willing or even insistent on assuming this burden-the Committee in recent years has not felt it fair to fail to give them much needed relief by insisting on a minimum faculty of three. Naturally, to avoid overloading, larger faculties are necessary a t the larger institutions in proportion to the enrollment. Inbreeding and the proportion of faculty having the doctorate are further factors that have given concern a t a few institutions. By far the most difficult factor to determine to the satisfaction of the Committee and to the conviction of the department mncerned is the "competence" or quality of the faculty or of individual staff members in "the fields covered." Of course the number and quality of publications is a reliable criterion of "research productivity." But the teaching qualifications which are so difficult to appraise a t home, as we all know, become almost impossible for outsiders to evaluate. And even when the Committee is convinced that the quality of a staff or some of its members is below standard, it is very embarrassing to put this opinion into writing. I t has always been the policy of the Committee to give its reasons for disapproval or rejection to any department requesting them. It is now the policy of the Committee to send, after visitation, to the head of the department (with a copy to the President of a given university) a statement of the strong and weak points of the chemistry department as viewed by the Committee. But when it is onlJ'a matter of competence of staff, our Committee has been reluctant to embarrass or jeopardize the position of a fellow chemist by giving an adverse opinion. A department, therefore, which believes i t has met all formal requirements and yet fails to get satisfaction or a satisfying explanation from the Committee, may do well to examine the individual competence or quality of some of its staff members. Finally, before leaving the field of undergraduate training, there might be brought to your attention one subject to which the Committee has from time to time given consideration without, however, reaching a conclusion that could be presented to the Council. I refer to the fairly large number of departments of chemistry that maintain a high standard of instruction in quality, but quantitatively do not meet the requirements for professional training. Their excellence is attested by the superior training given their students who go elsewhere to graduate or professional schools. Th? question has often been raised vhether these departments should not be given some type of certification in a different class. So far, there has been no demand for such classification and probably the desire for it does not exist. I mention it merely to assure that while our Committee is not seeking new responsibilities, it would be willing to consider and to present to the Council a proposal for such a classification if it were requested by a sufficient
372
JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL EDUCATION
number of institutions concerned. We have always re- SUMMARY OF OPINIONS FROM 57 EXECUTIVES OF gretted our inability to encourage and give some recog- CHEMICAL INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH nition to a department giving a high quality of training I regret that I cannot report that a majority of this without quantitatively meeting the requirements for number expressed blanket approval of Ph.D. work as professional status. However, i t must be remembered now given, although 11 more or less did so. Nearly all of that a new set of requirements would have to be set up the suggestions are constructive and, I believe, should and that a department which failed to be approved in be helpful. Only one suggested that since universities either class would be left in quite a doubtful position. are concerned with research' they should "research" The Committee has just begun a program of revisita- themselves to learn t'o do a better job. tion of all institutidns on the approved list. We would You may not be surprised that the largest number of have liked to arrange our revisitation program so as to complaints is directed a t the inability of Ph.D. graduresurvey those institutions which from the viewpoint ates to write and speak English. Over half of the reof the Committee most needed a survey, but on ac- spondents made this charge. Apparently the others count of the available time of visiting Associates and simply neglected to do so. No one asserted that the the cost to the Society, i t seemed the common-sense training of chemists in English is satisfactory. If this be thing to arrange for the visitation of as many institutions so of Ph.D.'s who have prepared theses accepted by as possible by a given Associate in on* itinerary. The our faculties and by the graduate schools, what atroobject of revisitation is to review the present situation, cious English must be used by many of our other gradnparticularly with reference to the ravages of the war and ates ~ 4 t less h training. Some schools have undertaken to correct this det.he influx of veterans. plorable lack by special courses in technical report GRADUATE TRAINING IN CHEMISTRY writing, but responsibility for English cannot be shoulIt was the original intent of the Council that the dered by the graduate or even undergraduate faculty. Committee on Professional Training should also con- The trouble lies deeper, in the high school and grammar cern itself with training a t the graduate level. Pendmg school, where sound principles of instruction have been a study of graduate training for professional chemists emasculated in favor of fads and worthless and harmful some general requirements were adopted and published fancies. This deplorable situation is all the more serious [ I d . Eng. Chem., News Ed., 17,592 (1939)l. in a democratic society where large elements of foreign Recently our Committee bas begun such a study. migration exist-intelligent, vigorous, but often without First a panel consisting of about 20 representatives of good English background within the family environsome of the principal graduate schools in chemistry ment. The radio and the "funnies" must also take and representatives of some of the industrial research their share of blame, and the latter is something that laboratories that employ large numbers of chemists with will not correct itself with the end df large immigration. postgraduate training was formed to advise our ComTo suggest what might be done to improve the inmittee. As a result it was decided to confine this study struction of college English is very difhcult and I am first to the Ph.D. degree, and a fact-findmg survey was sure quite beyond the abilities of the speaker. As alplanned in that area. An exhaustive questionnaire cov- ready stated it is my opinion that the faulty instruction ering practice, policy, and philosophy of graduate work begins much below the college 1evel.and that the r1.min chemistry for the Ph.D. was sent to a11 institutions edy would first have to be applied there. I have never giving graduate degrees in chemistry in the United been sympathetic with the modern methods of teaching States. Seventy-eight replies were received. While English which appear to have abandoned all ideas of great differences in detail were disclosed there was geu- grammar, parts of speech, or syntax. It is my candid era1 uniformity in policy and practice, within fairly wide opinion that a retqrn to some of these principles of inlimits between regulation and autonomy of choice of struction, which were thought to be basic a generation courses and pursuit of research by graduate students. ago, would doubtless bring about some improvement. Also, a questionnaire was addressed to a large num- But whether there are many teachers in the secondary ber (1157) of Ph.D. graduates in different age groups schools who would be interested in or competent to from about 25 institutions. The opinions varied widely, undertake such a revolutionary-and they might think from those who thought that what they had had in backward-step is open to serious question. To my college was still about right, to those who believed many mind i t would be worth a trial. When grammar, parschanges in the system of training would be beneficial. ing, and sentence diagramming went out the school Of especial interest were the replies from the directors window along with mental arithmetic, the students who of industrial research laboratories giving their advice as came up under the new system or lack of system were to the type of training of Ph.D.'s needed in industry. put under a serious handicap. Evidently this has now Owing to the fact that a large majority of our Ph.D. had time to show up a t the Ph.D. level. What can be trainees go into industry, I t b i i we must attach espe done a t the college level to correct these deficiencies is cia1 value to these comments. I wish it were possible to again another matter. Doubtless some additional attenpublish their letters in full, but as that hardly seems tion to report writing and public speaking would be in feasible I shall attempt to give you a brief summary, in- the right direction. I t is for the teachers of English to adequate thaugh it is in many respects. undertake these changes. Scientists can only call for
AUGUST, 1947
373
them, but first there must be the willingness to under- search men. While no individual limit per man was take reforms and the ability to carry them through. recommended, it was evident that there is a feeling that Rut turning to other topics, there was a large insist- the optimum is exceeded in some cases. The insistence mce that entrants to graduate work should be more on close contact between research direction and the thoroughly screened as to ability, aptitude, and many student i s evidently an extension of the same thought. personal qualifications. h o u g the latter, originality, On the other hand; i t is believed that in very small creative ability, and character are perhaps native char- graduate schools one loses the advantage of broader acteristics that can be developed by suitable environ- student contacts and the influence of group accomplishment but are not to be iustilkd or developed when to- ment and productivity. One advised a minimum of tally lacking. I t is urged, however, that such qualities 20 graduate students per university. Another strongly as leadership, cooperative spirit, team work, and an un- prefers the older institutions with a t least 40 years of dentanding of "human engineering" can be developed experience in graduate work. One respondent aptly as a' part of graduate training. put i t that "there isno substitute for a good faculty." There is a rather general complaint of lack of indeOne research director in industry felt that there has pendence on the part of the Ph.D. graduate, due in part been some relaxation in thequality of graduate training to his professors' having used him as a "pair of hands" during the war and that the standards should now be reinstead of putting him more on his own. stored and raised. Another felt that care should be With regard to course work itself, there is slight de- taken to make up the individual deficiencies of undermand for more, some for less. By far the grpatest stress. graduate training. A minor outside the field of chemis upon more fundamentals and less practical training. istry is pertinently suggested. Although there is a fair demand for more industrial oriThe comments were not entirely free of criticism of entation it is rather for the broad principles than for ' Ph.D. work and of Ph.D. graduates. One writer felt, more extensive knowledge of thp principles of economics that Ph.D.'s are expecting too high initial salaries a t and an ability to apply knowledge to the planning and present. Another felt that the new Ph.D. is "above his conduct of industrial research. job" in industry and he overvalues himself and must be There is considerable desire for a better knowledge of "plant broken." Another thought the degree not esforeign languages, especially German, wider acquaint- sential in graduate work and that the trainingis often ance with the patent literature, better command of too academic or too specialized. technique and of instrumentation. Several companies Of course too much weight cannot be given to one or a emphasized the value of t,he thesis and of Ph.D. re- few opinions. Since i t is the object of this review to search; only one thought research overemphasized. summarize, I should say that on the whole industrial A very general desire was expressed for a broader employers seem to besatisfied with the products of our knowledge of other fields than the one of sprcialization; graduate sch6ols in'chemistry. k diGersification of dethe student of organic chemistry should know 'more of mands indicates that the diversification of training will physical and vice versa; divisional isolation should be adequately meet the needs if proper choices are initially minimized by general colloquia. Some of the specific made or if opportunity for subsequent adjustment and subjects in which a few companies thought more gradu- refitting is afforded. Most companies seem glad to keep ate training is needed are colloids (alsp undergraduate), the men they get and find them useful. This would high polymers, mathematics, thermodynamics, princi- seem to be a wise attitude in the next cdming year when ples of chemical engineering, and biochemEtry. the demand will far exceed the supply of Ph.D. graduThe humanities received little attention-in the opin- ates. The Ph.D. hasnot only made his way in American ion of the speaker, much too little. One respondent chemical industry, but in large part he has helped make recommended them. One opposed them on the ground the industry. tbat too frequently they open the door for the introdncThe Committee greatly appreciates the full and tion of Communistic principles. Two recommended the thoughtful responses made by research directors to its inculcation of safety principles, one each recommended letter of inquiry.Verhaps it should be recorded as a the history of American chemical industry, current re- sort of record that at least two respondents expressed search, and a better balance between teaching and re- dismay at not receiving a full-fledged questionnaire. search. The Committee, both in its undergraduate and in its You will be pleased to know that the faculty was not graduate studies which may ensue, in no way wishes to forgotten-even fondly and respectfully remembered by standardize teaching, curricula, or research procedures quite a lew of the respondents. Salaries were thought to in any way which mill hamper the freedom of developbe too low, especially of the talented younger staff ing new methods, new techniques, and new approaches members. There was much emphasis on the quality of in American education. The Committee welcomes sugthe graduate faculty-that the members should be in- gestions and constructive criticism at all times. spiring, that there should be interchange of faculty a Attention is called to a paper by W. A. Gibbons, ~irector members between universities, and that the younger of General Development Division, United States Rubber Commen should be given more rapid promotion. pany, Passsic, New Jersey, "Careers in research," Industl-iol Re . cOnsiaerableconcern was the search, p. 108 (August 5, 1946), which dso contains a valuable ing of faculty members with graduate students and re- list of references to the Literature of this subject.
