TRAINING CHEMISTS FOR THE INDUSTRIES CHARLESA. ICn~usAND SAMUEL T. ARNOLD, BROWNUNIVERSITY, PROVIDENCE. &ODE
ISLAND
While there has been much discussion of certain phases of chemical education during the past few years, surprisingly little has been said concerning the subject matter that shonld be included in the course of study of the prospective chemist. Granted that the instructing staff is capable of presenting various subjects to the student in an interesting and understandable manner, there still remains the broad question as to what particular subjects in chemistry and the allied sciences, as well as in the humanities, constitute a suitable course of training for the student who expects to enter chemistry as a profession. How, for example, shonld a student's efforts be distributed between chemistry, physics, mathematics, biology, engineering, English and the foreign languages, economics, psychology, etc.; and where does research come in? Should the undergraduate student receive some training in the methods of research? Should first-year graduate students devote a considerable portion of their time to research or should they, instead, confine their efforts in the main to routine courses, including laboratory work? Certainly, a graduate student cannot be expected to carry on any research work that is worth mentioning if, a t the same time, he is to carry on an appreciable amount of routine laboratory work. The demand made on the student's time is constantly increasing. The call is ever for a broader training in science, for greater familiarity with research methods and for a better understanding of the languages and of various allied snbjects. With the rapid development of science, necessitating a greater concentration of the student's attention on new fields, where is he to find the time necessary for carrying out this ever-expanding program? And, if he cannot find the time, what is he to drop out of his course? If we continue to teach everything in chemistry that has been taught up to now and add thereto the new material that is fundamental and important, where is the student going to "get off?" The problem is obviously an intricate one and it is not our purpose to present a solution here. We may say in passing, however, that the obvious thing to do is to organize the subject matter of our curricula with greater care so as to avoid wastage and to adapt the courses of instruction to the needs of students individually. In other words, the course of training for each student shonld be laid out to meet his particular needs and abilities so that he may accomplish a maximum result with minimum expenditure of time and effort. This procedure shonld be put into practice as early as possible during the student's undergraduate years and shonld be continued throughout his later work.
A large majority of our graduates in chemistry find their way into the industry and even those who enter the academic field usually have some industrial contacts, as, indeed, they should if they are to interpret chemistry successfully to their students. Accordingly, it seemed to the writers that some light might be thrown on this problem by consulting with industrialists who come in contact with the human material supplied to the industries by the colleges and universities. The writers took occasion to visit a number of industrial and research laboratories for the purpose of gaining some idea of the industry's views on this matter. Various laboratories were visited and questions relating to the training of chemists were discussed with those in charge. Below are given the general conclusions that may be drawn from these discussions. On the whole, there was a greater unanimity of opinion than might have been anticipated. Owing to special needs of various industries, emphasis was placed on various phases of chemical training and specific defects in our system of training, as commonly practised, were pointed out. On all major questions, there was substantial agreement. The opinions expressed on various points are summarized below. Analytical Chemistry-There was general agreement that the fundamentals of analytical chemistry, both quantitative and qualitative analysis, are of primary importance in the training of chemists. Students need not be trained in special methods of analysis but they should be familiar with the various types of instruments employed in modern analytical and research laboratories. In many technical laboratories the new men are started on some kind of analytical work and it is evident that students not well trained in analytical chemistry are handicapped a t the outset. This applies particularly to graduates of four-year courses; men who have received the doctorate are more commonly started on research problems. The opinion was quite generally expressed that the quantitative side of chemistry should be stressed throughout the student's course of training. Organic Chemistry.-There was general agreement that the student should be well trained in the fundamentals of organic chemistry. The importance of organic analysis was emphasized by a number of men who were in close contact with the organic chemical industry. Highly specialized courses in organic chemistry were not favored. The industries prefer to give their chemists any special training that may be essential to their success. Particularly striking was the emphasis placed on physical chemistry, physics, and mathematics as an adjunct to the preparation of an organic chemist. Industrial Chemistry-Opinions as to the value of industrial chemistry varied. For the most part, it was thought that industrial chemistry served a useful purpose in giving students an idea of plant organization
854
JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL EDUCATION
MAY,1929
and operation. It was suggested that students could gain valuable plant experience by working during the summer. Engineering.-This subject was not particularly stressed, either by directors of research laboratories or by plant managers. Some engineering training was considered valuable provided that i t was along broad lines. Specialized engineering training was distinctly not favored. The tendency was rather to emphasize physics and mathematics, particularly in an under-graduate course. Briefly, engineering training was considered secondary to that in the fundamentals of physical science. English.-Facility in the use of the English language was stressed on every hand and there was general agreement that the men supplied to the industries by the universities are woefully lacking in this respect. This defect is particularly noticeable in those laboratories in which research workers have to make frequent reports. Seemingly, few of our graduates have the ability to present their results in suitable form either for a technical or a non-technical reader. This condition appears to be quite serious and there can be no doubt that, so far as English is concerned, our system of language instruction is practically a complete failure. Those who have had occasion to read first (or second) drafts of theses presented for graduate degrees will agree with the industrialists on this point. Foreign Languages.-A reading knowledge of foreign languages, particularly German, was considered essential by those who expressed themselves on this subject. Mathematics and Physics.-More training in these subjects was uniformly recommended. Those who expressed themselves were usually quite emphatic on this point. The prevailing impression was that our training in this direction is not carried as far as it should be. The importance of thermodynamics was emphasized. Collateral Subjects.-The opinion was frequently expressed that chemists should have some knowledge of economics, psychology, etc. Public speaking was also mentioned. In other words, anything touching on human relations is of value to the chemist. The Newer Developments of Chemistry-No decided sentiment was found in favor of introducing the newer developments of physics and chemistry, such as the modern atomic theory, etc., into the curriculum. I t was evident that few of the chemists interviewed had given this problem serious thought. Only in a few instances, where the industries had already come in direct contact with recent theoretical and experimental developments, was a decided and favorable opinion expressed. It was suggested that the ideas underlying the modern atomic theory should be introduced into chemistry a t the beginning of the freshman course. Research for Undergraduates.-No decided opinion was expressed in favor of introducing research problems into the senior year of the under-
VOL. 6. No. 5
TRAINING C ~ M I S TFOR S
INDUSTRIES
855
graduate course. Research for undergraduates was favored to some extent as a means for interesting the student but seemingly not for the purpose of training the student in research methods. Research for First-Year Graduate Students.-Practically every one, with whom the question was discussed, favored the plan to have the graduate student undertake some research problem in his first year of graduate work. In general, much emphasis was placed on the students' research training throughout his period of graduate study. However, research should not be camed on a t the expense of the students' further training in fundamental subjects underlying chemistry or physical science generally. Personality.-The importance of personality as a factor determining the students' success in the industries was stressed. The industries require men who fit into the modern type of organization. High character and the ability to mingle readily are essentials. Initiative and enterprise are a t times more important than "brilliancy." The personality factor was more strongly stressed by plant managers than by research directors but its importance was pointed out by all. Methods of Teaching.-While the methods of teaching, as now practised, were not specifically criticized, some research directors thought that the curiosity and interest of the student should be stimulated more generally. The power of independent thought and the spirit of inquiry should be developed. It was suggested that students of the research type might be separated from others and given a broader course of training, particularly along physical lines. Summary.-To recapitulate, there was general agreement among those who come in close contact with the graduates of our colleges and universities that practically all the fundamental courses in chemistry now given should be substantially retained. It was generally agreed, however, that there is no need for specialized courses in any subject. There was a strong sentiment in favor of broadening and strengthening the training of chemists along mathematical and physical lines but this should not be done at the expense of the fundamental chemical subjects. It was generally conceded that chemists are inadequately trained in the use of the English language. Our graduates, for the most part, have no facility in expressing themselves. A knowledge of the elements of economics, psychology, and similar subjects is very desirable. A reading knowledge of German and, if possible, of French is desirable, even in the case of undergraduate students. Finally, the student's personality, that is, his attitude toward his work, his ability to make contacts with other men, etc., is a primary factor in determining his success in practical life. In brief, in the opinion of chemists who are actively engaged in the industries, students should have all the fundamental work that we now give them
856
JOURNAL os CHEMICAL EDUCATION
MAY,1929
and, if possible, a great deal more along physical and mathematical lines. In addition, the more knowledge they have in the way of languages and cultural subjects, the more valuable they prove in the industries. Remarks.-In order to meet the requirements of the industries, our students need more thorough training, particularly in collateral subjects. How to arrange to give the students additional work in physics, mathematics, physical chemistry, English, the foreign languages, etc., without diminishing their training along purely chemical lines is a problem that the universities will have to solve. Already the student's time is so completely occupied with required and routine courses that he has all too little time for independent thought. If he should be loaded up with more required work, he would become more of an automaton than he already is. The only thing that can be done immediately is to redistribute the student's work in so far as this is possible. Much valuable time would be gained if students were properly prepared in English and the foreign languages. There is no reason why students should not enter college with a t least two years each of German and French. At the present time they usually present not more than two years of one language. In this connection it may be mentioned that most students entering the graduate school have insufficient preparation in the foreign languages, to say nothing of English. The truth of this statement is witnessed by the fact that in all graduate schools candidates for advanced degrees are required to pass language examinations. A great deal of the student's time is wasted in attempting to acquire a knowledge of the languages a t a time when the acquisition of such knowledge is more difficult than it would have been earlier. By properly laying out the course of study of the undergraduate student in chemistry, adapting it to his individual abilities and interests, it should be possible to give those students, who have facility along physical and mathematical lines, a more thorough foundation in these subjects. The success of this method will depend upon the care with which the individual cases are studied. Those who have had experience will agree that the adequate preparation of graduate students for practical life in a period of three years is rather an appalling task. The students who come to us have practically no knowledge of research and, in general, only a rather vague and elementary knowledge of the fundamentals of science. It is well-nigh impossible to give these men the training that they require in the time that is available. The remarkable development of the atomic theory, which now has a direct bearing on nearly all phases of chemistry, has introduced a tremendous mass of important material that needs to be added to what has previously been considered as being more or less essential to the student's training. It is becoming increasingly difficult to give the student
VOL. 6. No. 5
TRAINING CHEMISTS POR
THB INDUST~S
857
an adequate knowledge of chemistry and allied subjects and, a t the same time, to provide that measure of leisure which is essential for the development of independent thought. There is little or nothing that can be dropped out of the student's course of study. Time can be gained only by 'a more economical use of such time as there is. One obvious thing to do is to utilize the summer months. These could very profitably be devoted to research, thus allowing more time for study and thought during the remainder of the year. In the three years of graduate study now commonly required for the doctorate, the equivalent of one year could be gained for research. For those interested, it may be mentioned that a plan of this type is now in effect at Brown University. Any one familiar with the state of chemistry 25 or 30 years ago cannot but be struck by the enormous increase in opportunity along chemical lines. Never before has there been so great a demand for competent chemists. At the same time, it is very noticeable that the industries are becoming increasingly discriminating in their selection of men. They insist on a proper combination of ability, training, and personality. One cannot but feel that the opportunities for mediocre students are becoming more and more limited. Our colleges and universities must take account of this fact and undertake not only to train but also to select men who combine those qualities that are essential to success. One of the more encouraging features of the present investigation has been the whole-hearted interest shown in the subject by every one with whom we came in contact. We cannot mention the names of all those who so kindly contributed of their time and thought. We shall, however, mention some of those who assisted us in making the necessary personal contacts. These include Dr. Whitney of the Research Laboratory of the General Electric Company, Dr. Mees and Dr. Clark of the Eastman Kodak Company, Dr. Carveth of the Roessler & Hasslacher Chemical Company, Dr. Weidlein and Dr. Tillotson of the Mellon Institute, Dr. Edwards and Dr. Faragher of the Aluminum Company of America, and Mr. Holmes and Dr. Tanberg of the du Pont Company. We are particularly indebted to Dr. Carlisle of the Roessler & Hasslacher Chemical Company for making arrangements for us to meet a large company of chemists at Niagara Falls at luncheon where we had an opportunity to listen to a most interesting discussion for several hours. We also are indebted to Mr. Krauss of the du Pont Company for arranging numerous interviews at Wilmington.
'
