Karl Weiss, Robert N. Wiener, and Barry 1. Karger
The Work-Study Approach at Undergraduate and Graduate Levels
Northeastern University Boston, Mosrochuretts 021IS
Work-study patterns have earned a respected place in hieher education and.. hv" virtue of nractical and nhilo" sophical pressures, are becoming increasingly popular with colleees and universities. In the United States. workstudy education has taken the form of the cooperative plan and as of November 1971, i t is estimated over 300 institutions have some form of cooperative .program ( 1 ). What is behind the popularity of the cooperative educational pattern? Understandably, some of the reasons are practical, hut there is also a sound intellectual basis. Although many of the advantages of cooperative education have been surveyed in detail (2, 3), a closer look a t certain facets is approp~iate. How does cooperative education differ from the conventional college education? One may start with the observation that the universities and colleges create an environment which effectively prolongs adolescence. The typical college today is an artificial environment. It is an unnatural sequestration of people culled from a narrow age spectrum drawn from a small geographical base, and, frequently, from a restricted socio-economic stratum as well. Students in such an environment tend to generate a philosonhv and a set of values that lareelv - "eo unchallenged " within the campus, hut are frequently roundly criticized awav from it. The genesis of these conflicts is almost inevitabie, given the narrow perspectives that the typical college campus presents. One reality that rarely intrudes is that of the workaday world. Cooperative education, by contrast, mixes the world a t large and the classroom in a planned way. Its work periods, which alternate with the study periods, provide a chance for intellectual digestion. It tends to offset the continual expansion in botL quantity and level of sophistication which has marked formal education in the last decade. Work provides the link to reality. Yet i t is important to recognize that the cooperative student is a student first; he is clearly academic institution-based rather than industry-based.' Good arguments can he made that the benefits of work experience accrue from any regular employment. Nonetheless, the work is particularly beneficial when i t is linked to career ohiectives. even if these are tentative. In chemistry we are-fortunate that many find employment op~ortunitiesare available which allow the student to enhance his knowledge of the field. At Northeastern University, the chemistry major program was initiated in 1935, coincident with the estahlishment of the College of Liberal Arts. It has always been based on a five-year cooperative pattern, so that we have much information on which to base an assessment of this educational mode. These days one often hears that students have little understanding and appreciation of the kind of chemical work done in industry, and that a change in at-
."
-
Presented at the Symposium on "Industrial-Academic Cooperation in the Seventies," 163rd ACS National Meeting, Boston, Massachusetts, April, 1972. In this paper the designation "industry" will he understood to cover all non-academic organizations, such as manufacturing industries, federal and state agencies, hospitals, non-profit institutions, ete., which provide employment, as well as academic institutions themselves when they are involved in non-academic functions. 408
/ Journal of Chemical Education
titude toward industrial chemistry i s needed. The cooperative plan provides a viahle means for correcting this weakness in the training process. The core of hasic knowledge acquired in the classroom insures that the practical experience is meaningful. There is no question that it places chemistry in a more realistic perspective than academic training alone, and that it can provide challenging insights into what chemistry can do outside its own confines. Many of the arguments for the work-study pattern a t the undermaduate level also a n ~ l vto maduate studv. although i n i h i s case different boundary conditions dictate a modified approach. At the maduate level we need to clarify for whom-the education is intended and what emphases are appropriate. The present .programs tend to overlook that the new PhD graduates in chemistry who end up in industry, government laboratories, and research institutes outnumber those who take un academic careers bv a factor of almost two (4). ~ o r e o v & ,a trend for more chemists to work outside the classically defined fields of chemistry has become evident (5). ~ h e s efactors as well as the harsh facts about the market for chemists with graduate degrees have prompted us to reexamine our essentially donventional graduate program and to inaugurate, on an experimental basis, a work-study doctoral program which fosters a more balanced view of the relation between the basic and applied chemical sciences. The new program is hopefully anticipated to correct misconceptions about the nature and rewards of problem-oriented endeavors, and to provide new philosophical orientations for graduate study. Undergraduate Cooperative Education in Chemistry The cooperative education program a t Northeastern University is based on the academic quarter system. During the five years between admission and graduation, the students spend eleven quarters at the University and seven quarters a t work. The freshman year is devoted to full-time academic activities and the work periods commence in the sophomore year. Table 1illustrates the plan. For practical reasons the-student body is divided into two sections (divisions), and if one division follows the alternating work-study scheme shown, the other division follows the analogous scheme in which the work and study periods are interchanged. There are two chemistry degree options, leading to the BS and BA degrees, respectively. The BS program meets the minimum requirements of the American Chemical Society for degree certification. In hoth degree programs the sequence of chemistry courses is conventional. General Table 1. Alternating Work-Study Pattern in the College of Liberal Arts" Year Freshman Sophomore Middler Junior Senior
Sept. 1
Work
Dee. 2 4
6
Work
10
Work
Work
8
March
June-Se~t.
3 Work
Vacation
Work
9
7
5
Work
11
- -
This scheme applies for one division (see texi). For the second division, the work periods become study periods, and vice versa. a
chemistry is taken during the freshman year, organic chemistry during the sophomore and middler (third) years, physical chemistry during the middler and junior years, and analytical chemistry during the freshman and junior years. The experimental aspects of physical chemistry and instrumental analysis are combined in an integrated laboratory sequence during the middler and junior years. The last three quarters are relatively free of required courses and may be utilized by students to follow their individual inclinations. The process of work placement begins during the freshman year. Matching a chemistry student and his particular interests and capabilities with a work assignment is a comnlex nroblem which calls for the services of nrofessional personnel who can provide expert planning and sunervision. At Northeastern Universitv these functions are performed by a staff of trained coordinators with faculty rank who maintain close liaison with the academic departments. The magnitude of the placement operation can he appreciated by bearing in mind that a total of about 9,000 students in 8 colleges are actively engaged in the alternating work-study plan. The cooperative employment onnortunities in chemistrv and related areas have invarial& exceeded the numberbf students seeking placement: understandablv, in the currently unfavorable job market the choice of positions is less extensive than it has been in the past. During the current (1971-72) academic vear there are 95 upperclass chemistry students with cooperative work assienments. This numher has remained essentiallv cons&nt for the last three years. The present number bf employers is 53, representing a wide range of activities and about 100 job opportunities (cf. Table 2). There is an additional pool of companies (not listed) who have interest in employing chemistry students. Geographically, the employers are heavily concentrated in the New England area, with a few in New York, New Jersey, and the District of Columbia. While the center of gravity of the distribution is Massachusetts, in particular the Greater Boston area, cooperative work assignments have taken students as far afield as England and Germany in recent years. The most general job title for chemistry students is laboratory assistant or technician, but these terms give little information about the large variety of activities which are actually undertaken. These activities range from participation in basic research to production-scale operations in chemical plants. A general trend is that the job emphasis shifts from quality control and analytical work for sophomores toward research and development work for seniors. Understandably, the students prefer assignments which
-
Table 2. Employers of Chemistry Students, 1971-72 Type‘'
Chemical Products Federal, State, and Local Government Agencies Polymers and Plastic Products Metal and Metal Products Universities Scientific Consultant Rubber Products Photographic Products Radiochemical Products Medical Laboratories Paper Products Food Industries Pharmaceutical Prcducts Business Services Dye and Paint Products Research Institute
No. of No. of Employers Positionsb 7
9
6 6 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 2
14 10 7 12 10 7
2
6 4
3 3
2
3 3
2 2 1
2 2 2
s In sume case, the class~ficationrefers to divisions of aiversified companies which rmploy rnoperntive students. "Comted as total numher ut'oos~ta,nst'or students in both divisions (see text).
are of a non-routine nature. Careful screening by the coordinator ensures that all the jobs for chemistry students have substantial scientific and/or technical content. That many of the job opportunities listed in Table 2 are with oreanizations whose nrime activities are not in chemistrv demonstrates to the students in a concrete way the manifold nature of chemistw and the important role i t plavs in diverse fields of endeavor. ~ x p o s u r kto a variety i f work experiences is encouraged and, during the four-year cooperative work period, the average numher of different johs held by a chemistry student is 2. Salary is an important factor in cooperative work, for i t helps the students underwrite the cost of their education. Average pay scales for 1971-72 academic year are $1021 week for sophomores on their first assignment and $1501 week for seniors during their last quarter of work (6). These figures are without payroll deductions. Thus the average gross incomes per quarter (13 weeks) are in the range $1325 to $1950. In most cases fringe benefits such as holiday pay, sick pay, and vacation pay are given. The fact that income derived from the job is used to cover educational expenses has a direct effect on the geographical distribution of the cooperative work assignments. Thus, to reduce living expenses, the students generally prefer to take jobs near their homes. Since most of our students are from New England, the jobs they take tend to be concentrated in the same general area. Cooperative undergraduate education in chemistry does not necessarily predispose the students to by-pass graduate study upon graduation. The percentage of chemistry graduates admitted to graduate schools varies between 22% and 50%. Of the 85 bachelor degree graduates of the last six years, 28 (35%) have taken up graduate work in chemistry. Industrial johs, the armed forces, and professional schools account for the remainder. With the operational details we have presented in mind, a summarizing look a t how the work-study pattern affects the undergraduate education of chemists is in order. Firstly, we see that, since the academic core is essentially the same as in conventional four-year programs, the benefits are additional rather than substitutional. Secondly, apart from the enhanced personal development of the student and the obvious advantages of an income, the workstudy pattern (a) provides non-academic experience in a focussed goal-oriented way; ( b ) allows the student to see chemistry in action, i.e., in situations where it matters; (c) introduces to the students problem-oriented activities; ( d ) illustrates the interdisciplinary aspects of chemistry. Finally, we can look a t some possible new directions for work-study education in chemistry. At Northeastern University, a greater decentralization of the job opportunities is desirable. This calls for the willingness of the students to accept jobs remote from their home. Financial realities will present difficulties in such assignments. Some credit toward degree requirements for non-academic work is another innovation^ which deserves serious consideration. This practice is already followed by a number of institutions with coonerative plans. In chemistw, with proper supervision add evaluation, selected work exp&ence might replace some academic laboratory activities. Closer liaison between industry and the department could he achieved by seminars with credit for the students, in which industrial representatives participate.
-
Northeastern Plan for Work-Study Doctoral Education in Chemistry
The most important years in the philosophical growth of a scientist are those he spends in graduate school. Traditionallv. graduate science departments gear their programs t i th;r training of future academicians, and pay little heed t o the development of attitudes and perspectives which are important in problem-oriented work of the nature undertaken in industry. Obviously, academically Volume 50, Number 6. June 1973 / 409
trained scientists do become industrial scientists, but, nonetheless, the dichotomy between what can be loosely classified as "pure" and "applied" orientations becomes sharply defined in graduate school. Attitudes are likely to he persistent, and the proper time to achieve a philosophically balanced orientation is during graduate study. The experimental work-study doctoral program i n chemistry which will be described is based on our belief that a balanced perspective about chemistry requires graduate education to take place both inside and outside the universities. Industrial scientists must join forces with academic scientists in the education of PhD chemists. I t is important to emphasize that the work-study plan we have initiated does not merely provide on-the-job training for future industrial chemists. Rather, i t focusses on the nhilosonhical balancine which is needed for whateuer ca;eer the graduate is to~ollow.The plan is an outgrowth of an earlier, informal nroposal which was discussed and modified at a meeting hetween the representatives of 16 non-academic organizations and Northeastern Uni\.ersity faculty members and administrators. At the outset we came to the conclusion that graduate education did not lend itself to the alternating work and study periods that characterize undergraduat; coop education and which have worked so successfullv there. A longer period than thirteen weeks is needed if t h e graduate student is to make a meaningful contrihution to his cooperative employer. One year is approximately the time required to both provide the immersion necessary to achieve the desirednhiloso~hical~ersnectiveand to Dermit the graduate student to "earn hfs way." Students are recruited directly into the work-study plan from college. The program is a select one, and participants are chosen competitively from those who specifically apply for it. The admitted students spend their first year in graduate school largely in the classroom along with the students in the traditional channel. During this time, they are often supported by a teaching assistantship. At Northeastern, the separation of doctoral students from terminal masters candidates occurs a t the end of the initial year of residence and is based on the grades earned. To remain in the program, a participant must achieve doctoral student status. Toward the end of the first year, the students begin interviews with the cooperating laboratories. The cooperating laboratories are a group of industrial, governmental, and clinical laboratories which are located within the commuting perimeter of Boston. The second year is basically the year at work. Several schedules are listed in Table 3, and others are possible by special arrangement. During the work period the graduate student maintains two important contacts with the university. Firstly, he normally enrolls in one graduate course Table 3. Some Representative Graduate Work-Study Patternsa
Seot. PlanP Year 1 Year 2
Year 3 and heyand Plan lIc Year 1 Year 2
Dec.
June
March
Sent.
NU
NU
NU
Work
Work
Work
Work Work
NU
NU
NU
Work
Work Work
NU and Research
NU Work
signmen&withinthe cooperating laboratory. 410 /Journal of Chemical Education
in each of the academic quarters. Since our graduate courses meet in the evening, this poses no particular strain on his working schedule. Northeastern University has, for nearly bwenty years, maintained a part-time graduate program leading to the MS in chemistry. The degree is attained solely by course work. Our experience with this program has shown that one course per quarter is not an undue hardship on a full-time industrial chemist and does not create a "two masters" dilemma which could be intolerable. The second contact is the work-study seminar in which the faculty, the graduate students, and their industrial supervisors meet to discuss problems pertaining to their work and the nroaam. This seminar is not just another research talk. It is-the place for a meaningful dialogue between all participants, a true academic-industrial interface. The reason we have chosen only organizations in the Boston perimeter is to permit these two contacts to he maintained. Without them, we feel the program becomes nothing more than a one-year leave of absence during which a graduate student holds an industrial job. This is not to say that a year's industrial experience is not of value, but without continuity and interchange, it is not as valuable as it could he to him. T o both the cooperating laboratory and to the university, this type of arrangement could be of limited utility, but of very little real value. No dialogue ensues, and without dialogue there is not much philosophical growth on either side. At the end of the work period (usually the beginning of the third vear) " . the student returns to full-time student status. During this year he will take the cumulative examinations in his chosen field. These examinations are completed, successfully or otherwise, within, a t most, a period of six months. At the beginning of this year, the graduate student also chooses a research director, a thesis topic, and begills research. The student's choice of thesis tooic is likelv to be more thouehtful and mature than is triditional i n graduate schools. +he reason, we feel, lies in his industrial exDosure and the better nhilosonhical balance it has prov(ded. The student will iring bbth his ex~eriencesand his nersnective to the formulation of the rebearch problem. He will ask questions which are different from those of the student who lacks this exposure. The student's formal connection with the cooperating laboratory will hopefully not end at this time. There may be some relationship between the research problem and the work that was carried out during his work period and, as a result, his work supervisor may become a vital partner in the doctoral research. The company may wish to partially subsidize the research either by a stipend to the student or by the purchase of some specialized equipment. The student may carry out substantial phases of his doctoral research a t the cooperating laboratory on equipment not available a t Northeastern. Arrangements beyond the second vear are extremelv flexible and can he neaotiated between the interestedUparties. The chemistry f&ultv has onlv three boundarv conditions which it feels are ed&ationalG mandated. ~ f r s t l ~ the , research should he centered a t the university; secondly, the doctoral research must be open and free for immediate publication; and thirdly, the student must complete all the academic requirements that students in the traditional program must meet. The most obvious beneficiary of this approach to doctoral training is the graduate student, and we feel that his greatest gain is intangihle. He will hopefully emerge from this educational experience with a philosophical harmony between "pure" and "applied" points of view which will allow him to productively pursue the career of a chemist. I t is well to remember that most of the chemists earning their PhD's in the 1970's will necessarily seek employment with industrial organizations. The philosophical balance attained will not only permit the chemist to function in
an industrial context. i t will urovide him the inner satisfaction of enjoying what he dbes. o f t i h ~ h e a r dcomplaints about "attitude" and "snobbishness" will ho~efullvcease. There are immediately tangible benefits as dell. 1; an industrial job, the student will come in contact with expertise not available a t the university. He may become familiar with different experimental techniques. The workstudy graduate student will have made a very important employment contact. Lastly, a by no means inconsequential facet of the nromam is that the student will have earned one year's salary a t a level commensurate with his background and training. The work period is not an artificially constructed internship. He, thk student, is a normal employee of the cooperating laboratory and is paid as such. and industrial chemists earn sienificantlv more than teaching assistants or research fellows. The benefits to the university are manifold. The professors with their purely academic orientation are brought into contact with the ~roblem-orientedworld. This occurs not only through the dork-study seminar series, which is a continuing open dialogue, but also in the three-way interactions between student, work supervisor, and professor a t the research level which are anticipated to ensue. Channels of communication, once opened, may lead to interac-
tions which are presently hard to envision. Even if, for example, no joint, research papers are forthcoming, one can hardly deny that both philosophically and practically universities and industry bave much to learn from one another. Some of the benefits to the cooperating industrial lahoratory have already been alluded to. One very tangible benefit is that, during the work period, the company has had an opportunity t o observe the student in action in the context of its operation. His possible place in their longrange plans can be assessed far better this way than as the result of the usual interviews. Even viewed solely as a recruiting mechanism, the work-study should bave much appeal to industrial organizations. The Northeastern Work-Study PhD program was begun in September, 1972, with a limited number of carefully selected students. Literature Cited
Volume 50, Number 6. June 1973 / 411
