TRENDS in CHEMICAL EDUCATION P. M. GINNINGS Greensboro College, Greensboro, North Carolina
T
00 MUCH credit cannot be given the National Research Council and associated workers for their careful and comprehensive census of graduate research students in chemistry and chemical engineering which has been published yearly for the last decade.' The purpose of this paper is to enhance the value of the census by presenting these data in certain specialized graphical forms which facilitate some general statistical analyses. The author hopes that the accompanying graphs will aid the reader in obtaining a general idea of the trends that seem to be present in the detailed census and which might not be so apparent otherwise. Liberal use has been made of a favorite tool of statisticians-the logarithmic function graph, sometimes called the "ratio graph." This type is especially useful when the analyst wishes to compare statistical data of widely different arithmetical magnitudes, as equal relative changes in the data result in curves with equal slopes, regardless of the absolute figures. Perhaps the reader should he reminded that absolute heights in these logarithmic curves should not be considered unless the vertical scales are carefully kept in mind; only slopes should be compared. In Chart 111, a derived function type of curve has been constructed hy plotting the logarithmic rate of change (rate of increase or decrease) against the time. This increases the accuracy of the visual examination of the curves in Chart I1 and magnifies the trends.
hibited a greater sensitivity to the depression. A small decrease in 1932 was followed by a serious decrease in 1933 but 1934 brought a stop to this decline by showing a slight increase in the candidates for the Master's degree. The rapid increase in the number of the faculty members in chemistry during the period from 1927 to 1930 has been followed by a much slower but generally consistent rise'from 1930 to date.
WITH R&FERENCE TO CHART I
Annual output of Ph.D.'s in,all subjects in the last decade has steadily increased. The annual output of Ph.D.5 in chemistry alone has s h o d an irregular hut general increase during this same decade. From 1924 to 1928, the rate of increase of Ph.D.'s in chemistry alone has been less than the rate for Ph.D.'s in all subjects. Since 1928, the rate of increase of those in chemistry has been approximately the same as the rate of increase in all subjects. The total number of graduate students in chemistry increased rapidly to a maximum in 1932. WITH REFERENCE TO CHART I1
Separation of the composite group of graduate students in chemistry into the two contributing g r o u p s t h e Masters and Doctors groups-reveals that the adverse economic conditions have really only halted the rise of those working for the Doctorate in chemistry; no significant decrease has been evident a t any time. As a contrast, the Masters group has ex-
WITH REPERENCE TO CHART 111
The maximum rate of increase of students working for the Doctorate occurred in 1929. The same was true of the Masters group. Secondary peaks in the rate of increase curves occurred in both the Doctors and I ~ a r nm . WEST.J. Cn~ar.EDUC.,12, 339 (July. 1935) and Masters groups in 1931. Both groups exhibited maxiprevious reports. 390
-
mum rate of decrease in 1933 when the low points of both curves were reached. The reversal in the slopes of the two curves indicates the recovery that occurred in graduate student registration in chemistry in 1934.
Of course, some of the above conclusions are more or less evident from general observationwithout recourse to statistical analysis, but perhaps some of the trends have not been so apparent to the average observer. As for the future, it would seem that the highly trained graduate in chemistry will have an even greater advantage than he has had in the past.
