EDUCATION

Chemists Give Mixed Review Of NRC Report On Doctoral Education

• Report says how science and engineering programs could better prepare students for careers outside basic research

Linda Ross Raber, C&EN Washington

The National Research Council (NRC) Committee on Science, Engineering & Public Policy re­

port, "Reshaping the Graduate Educa­tion of Scientists and Engineers/' has sparked lively debate in universities and industry about the proper role of Ph.D.-degree-granting science and en­gineering departments in the U.S.

The report makes general recom­mendations that deal with preparing students for employment outside aca­deme, controlling the time it takes to get a Ph.D. degree, the nature of grad­uate student support, and the numbers and kinds of students enrolled in Ph.D. science and engineering programs. All of these recommendations have the goal of helping students by increasing the relevance and applicability of their

graduate education (C&EN, April 24, page 7).

The 200-page report is the work of an NRC committee of 19 people plus a half-dozen panels of experts from uni­versities, government, industry, foun­dations, and other sectors. The commit­tee was chaired by mathematician Phillip A. Griffiths, director of the Cen­ter for Advanced Study in Princeton, N.J. The committee put out a call last year for comments from scientists, en­gineers, administrators, students, and educators across the country, which drew more than 100 replies. The com­mittee also conducted a survey of grad­uate students asking what information they needed to make decisions.

In a nutshell, the report says doctor­al programs in science and engineering in the U.S. could better prepare stu­dents for careers outside basic research by increasing student versatility, rather than on specialization.

To help the goal of versatility along, the committee recommended a change in the balance of graduate student sup­port. Currently, much student support comes in the form of research assistant-ships from grants or contracts. The committee advises incorporating more

Rising share of physical/mathematical sciences and engineering Ph.D.s

Number of doctorates awarded

granted 1

Total

Physical/mathematical sciences 4,426 Chemistry Physics/astronomy Mathematics Computer sciences Environmental sciences

Engineering

TOTAL

1,759 1,043

701 286 637

2,781

7,207

to non 1983

-U.S. citizens

Temporary visa

926 283 256 209

72 106

1,170

2,096

Source: "Selected Data on Science & Engineering Doctorate Awards

% of total

20.9% 16.1 24.5 29.8 25.2 16.6

42.1%

29.1%

Total

6,496 2,139 1,543 1,146

878 790

5,696

12,192

1993

Temporary visa

2,363 674 583 517 349 240

2,783

5,146

% of total

36.4% 31.5 37.8 45.1 39.7 30.4

48.9%

42.2%

: 1993," National Science Foundation

Rising share of science Ph.D.s work in industry Percent employed 60

1973 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91

Note: Figures do not include about 20% of scientists and engineers with U.S. Ph.D.s employed by federal government and other employers. Source: National Science Foundation

education/training grants into the mix. These grants would be awarded com­petitively to departments on the basis of how the proposed work would con­tribute to student versatility.

In addition, the committee was con­cerned that getting a Ph.D. degree of­ten takes too long. It recommended more departmental control on time to obtain a Ph.D. degree. A student's edu­cation, according to the committee, should be moved along at a pace that would most benefit the student in his or her future career.

The committee expects that the im­provements it recommends "can be made without disruption of the tradi­tional commitment to excellence in ba­sic research that has been, and must continue to be, a hallmark of the U.S. system of graduate education/'

In addressing the somewhat conten­tious issues of limiting the numbers of Ph.D. science and engineering students in general and of non-U.S.-citizen Ph.D. students in particular, the committee demurred. It did not find enough con­vincing evidence that limitations were necessary or desirable.

44 MAY 29, 1995 C&EN

The report emphasizes again and again, "American graduate schools have done a superb job of preparing young scientists and engineers to be­come original researchers—to become the scientific and technical leaders of the nation." And virtually no one dis­putes that. There is some difference of opinion, however, about the effects of implementing the recommendations of the committee.

Employment trends The report says, "Although increas­

ing numbers of new Ph.D.s have been readily absorbed into the job market over the years, there are clear indica­tions that new Ph.D.s in some fields are not finding employment as easily as they would have years ago, and gradu­ates who have found employment have been more likely to find less-desirable or less-secure positions than earlier graduates."

The report uses data collected by the National Science Foundation to com­pare cohorts of scientists and engineers five to eight years after receipt of a Ph.D. degree—after most of them have completed a period of postdoctoral study. More than half the 1969-72 sci­ence and engineering Ph.D.s were em­ployed in universities in 1977, com­pared with less than 43% of the 1983-86 Ph.D.s in 1991. Only 26% of Ph.D. scientists and engineers were em­ployed in business and industry in 1973, compared with 34% in 1991.

Data for a similar cohort of chemis­try Ph.D.s indicate 32% employed in academe in 1977 and only 21% in 1991. Business and industrial employment for chemists has increased for those five to eight years after receiving the Ph.D. degree. In 1977, 46% were em­ployed in industry; in 1991, 61% were.

Ph.D.s are increasingly working in types of positions that they had not ex­pected to occupy. And it's taking long­er to get these jobs.

The report says, "Evidence obtained through surveys of recent Ph.D.s shows that an unusually high percentage of sci­entists and engineers are still looking for employment at the time of, or soon after, receiving their doctorates. Some fields are experiencing double-digit unem­ployment for increasing periods after graduation." It cites the 1993 ACS Salary Survey finding that more than 16% of the Ph.D. class of 1993 were seeking em­ployment during the summer of 1993.

Burke: students become focused too early

Kostiner: many faculty resist change

Heindel: report ducks important issue

The NRC report says unemployment rates for 1992 and 1993 science and en­gineering Ph.D. graduates was about 2%. This rate compares favorably not only with the overall unemployment rate—which was above 6% in the early 1990s—but also with the 2.6% unem­ployment rate in 1992 and 1993 among professional occupations generally, and 3% unemployment in the early 1990s among those with a college degree.

The bottom line is that scientific and engineering Ph.D.s do eventually find employment, but in some fields and for some students the process of finding an appropriate position is taking much longer than it did for their predecessors.

Employment in industry "Over the long term, demand for

graduate scientists and engineers in business and industry is increasing; more employment options are avail­able to graduate scientists and engi­neers who have multiple disciplines, minor degrees, personal communica­tion skills, and entrepreneurial initia­tive," says the report.

The anecdotal information collected via the committee's call for comments indicates that although employers are generally pleased with the result of U.S. graduate education, they have some specific concerns as to its breadth, versa­tility, and skill development. "In partic­ular, employers do not feel that the cur­rent level of education is sufficient in providing skills and abilities to the peo­ple they are interested in employing, particularly in communication skills (in­cluding teaching and mentoring abilities for academic positions); appreciation for applied problems (particularly in an in­dustrial setting); and teamwork (espe­cially in interdisciplinary settings)," the report says.

"Over the past 10 years, I believe that Ph.D. preparation has changed," says James D. Burke, manager of re­search recruiting and university rela­tions for Rohm and Haas. "There seems to be less education and more training. Savage competition for fund­ing and the need to produce almost im­mediate results has driven this change. As a result, students seem less curious than before because they have been made to become focused early. I don't see the situation changing much in the near future."

Edward Kostiner, professor of chem­istry at the University of Connecticut,

MAY 29,1995 C&EN 45

EDUCATION

Task force will recommend reduction of Ph.D.s In a report expected to be released in August, the ACS Presidential Task Force on Doctoral Education will make public its analysis of a survey of Ph.D. degree recipients in chemis­try. The task force grew out of a rec­ommendation made by then-ACS President Ned D. Heindel's Interac­tive Presidential Colloquium, "Shap­ing the Future: The Chemical Re­search Environment in the Next Cen­tury," held one year ago.

The colloquium group recom­mended, among other things, a re­duction in the number of Ph.D.-granting departments "to ensure that each remaining institution has an ad­equate support to develop graduate programs of the highest possible quality." The task force's charge was to collect benchmarking data that would provide information on a vari­ety of topics, including the number of Ph.D.s in the "postdoc pipeline."

The group collected information from close to two-thirds of the chem­istry graduates who received their Ph.D. degrees during the past seven years to determine their employment status. Some of the group's prelimi­nary findings indicate an annual oversupply of chemistry Ph.D.s in the U.S. workforce of between 250 and 400. This is an oversupply that the task force believes could be ad­dressed in one of several ways.

David K. Lavallee, provost at City College of New York, is chairman of the task force. He says, "There are too many Ph.D.s produced." He bases this conclusion on his group's finding that the rate of unemploy­ment among Ph.D. recipients is the same across the board whether stu­dents receive their degree from a highly ranked school, a not so highly ranked school, a big department, or a small one.

"The unemployment rate doesn't differ too much," says Lavallee. "If you could say that unemployment was a problem for people from institutions that weren't very good, maybe then you could reason that [unemploy­ment] was deserved—but it doesn't seem to be that way. Anecdotal evi-

Lavallee: too many Ph.Ds produced

dence says that there are people who have worked in good research groups and have done a good thesis at a good school and are still having trouble finding a suitable position."

The task force based its findings on the assumption that after about three or four years, postdoctoral ap­pointments are no longer desirable. The group took the sum of the unem­ployment rate and the number of Ph.D.s who persist in postdoctoral positions for an excessive period of time to come up with its figures.

"If the excessive period of time is taken to be more than four years," says Lavallee, "that would be 10% in postdoctoral positions four years af­ter the Ph.D. plus the unemployment rate of 2.5% to equal 12.5%. If you use three years as the cutoff, then that's 17% plus 2.5% and that comes to 19.5%."

From all this, the group came up with a number—the annual number by which it believes Ph.D. degrees should be cut. Lavallee says, "The number of students is an excess pro­duction of between 250 and 400 Ph.D.s depending on what you deem to be the most appropriate number of years to stay in a postdoctoral position."

This number could be reduced in several ways, he says. "If you took the lowest producing 80 Ph.D. degree pro­grams out of the 180 existing ones, and eliminated all of them, that would get you to the [optimum] number. That action, however, would result in a lot of states that would be without Ph.D. programs in chemistry. In Montana or Wyoming or Nevada, the four-year schools and the community colleges get most of their faculty from their local Ph.D.-producing institutions. So there would be a tremendous rip­ple effect."

He continues, "We did not see the American Chemical Society getting into the position of saying that the 80 schools should drop their Ph.D. pro­grams. These schools have people go­ing into positions at the same rate as every other school. They serve partic­ular geographic populations and eth­nic populations, and they seem to be placing their students.

"You could also take the 50 highest producing programs and reduce their production by between a sixth and a quarter. Or you could reduce the number of students on temporary vi­sas by about one-third. Or some com­bination of these."

When the report comes out, how­ever, Lavallee says it will recommend establishing criteria that an institu­tion should use in deciding whether to spend its resources on a doctoral program. Schools should ask: "What are the sort of things that a good pro­gram has? What are the quality crite­ria that an institution should use in order to foster the retention of a high-quality program?

"We don't think that ACS should get into the business of deciding which programs should stay and which should go," he says. Lavallee suggests: "ACS could make its guides for graduate students some­what more explicit in terms of saying that these are the kinds of things we feel a good program has—be sure you ask about them, rather than be­ing a bit more oblique, as we are now. We are not as specific as we might be. That's the way we need to go in terms of reduction. And I think that's where we're coming down."

Storrs, and chairman of the ACS Com­mittee on Economic & Professional Af­fairs, believes, "It is of supreme impor­tance that we broaden the training of our students at all levels and provide them with all the necessary tools to

succeed in the real world. Most of our students do not go into academe. They have to be able to talk to scientists in other fields as well as nonspecialists. They have to have communication skills,

fields outside their own perhaps narrow field, and it is essential that we help them."

Ned D. Heindel, professor of chemis­try at Lehigh University and 1994 ACS

they have to be knowledgeable about president, likes the report but doesn't

46 MAY 29,1995 C&EN

Come visit our new Home

(Page, that is) URL: http://pubs.acs.org

The American Chemical Society Publications Division welcomes you to visit our new Home Page on the World Wide Web. Here you can find all kinds of useful information on ACS Publications including detailed descriptions of books

and periodicals, new releases, product information, hot articles and more.

Continuously updated, our new Home Page brings you:

• Hot Articles A special section containing articles or news items of interest.

• Advertised Product Information Network (PIN) A new way to get more information on products and services advertised in ACS publications electronically.

• Supporting Information (formerly known as Supplementary Material) FREE to subscribers of Journal of the American Chemical Society and soon all other ACS journals.

• Books and Journal Information New releases, author information and the full catalog containing descriptions and tables of contents of ACS titles—including the backlist.

Plus, an easy "back" to the American Chemical Society Home Page (URL: http://www.acs.org) for full information on the Society and its activities.

Visit the ACS Publications Home Page. We 're open 24 hours a day.

ACS III PUBLICATIONS Essential Resources for the Chemical Sciences

\ RCS Publications Division \ ||http://pobs.»o*.orq/

ACS III PUBLICATIONS

tmlbtijflML·^ «liiLMÎfe&àί^^llJLaιl·laΛ^φJί!mJL·φm>mίnbmιSιlélΛÈM^L·ΛM

* *Πf^fTTf^rWir^WYmCl, 'Λι™^^Vfnt % i-Y^r-f^fn " f-ΓΠ ù^pn

^ S S S f ^ ^ ^ f f ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ T O ? ? ^ ? ^ ^ mmi^n^mn^mm^z^mi^^nni^m^

^iAiisaMvrSisMaa^&imJa. [ACS Publication Dirieon Paael

y^MM^Mn^Wm^^S

r£ φψηι^ηιΐίι^νιψ^ίψΜψι^^τ^ψ^Λ^ ^snwm^fj^mwe^mmmemm^iji

MÊÊMmmwMÊfflÊmÊÊmmwmm

• W i:'F> u!FTf ( € P • ^ f 2 P

mm^mMSMSs^sE^^m

s i t i sa^Ms^

^2£ΙΕ3Η2

SSSHSK

EDUCATION

Wnghton: specialization is unavoidable

think this recommendation will go over particularly well with some academics. He anticipates a backlash. "Many of them won't believe it," he says.

Burke believes the report will be taken seriously by departments that have "strong associations with chemical com­panies and less so by those without such linkages and by those that mistakenly believe they are great. Some depart­ments significantly overestimate their excellence," he says. "The best depart­ments happen to be the ones most recep­tive to change and external influence." Burke believes that receptiveness helps to account for their excellence.

"Many faculty members resist the suggestion that their students take courses, especially courses not absolute­ly germane to their Ph.D. thesis," says Kostiner. He sees this trend trickling down into undergraduate education as well. "That is a disgrace," he says. "We should be providing our students with any tool that they could possibly use God forbid a chemistry major should take a course in materials science or en­gineering or a course in economics or art appreciation. Faculty members consider any course that is outside their require­ments a waste of time."

Burke says, "Students who think only about their immediate work and that of their group, and little else, con­cern me for two reasons. First, they are starting their professional careers with a sadly constricted view of science and technology. Second, they are behaving this way because that is what their fac­ulty advisers encourage. Many contem-

48 MAY 29,1995 C&EN

§ porary graduate students—even at ex-£ cellent schools—are beginning to look S like exquisitely trained technicians, ^ who will have great trouble leading ex-° ploratory research."

"At the Ph.D. level," Kostiner says, "many faculty members feel that stu­dents are there to do the faculty's work." Furthermore, he says that the system is going to break down because there are precious few faculty positions open. "We cannot have the luxury of training our students to replace ourselves. That is a luxury that no longer exists, and the reason is simple: Just as there has been a general downsizing in industry, there has been a downsizing in academe."

Mark S. Wrighton, provost and chief academic officer at Massachusetts Insti­tute of Technology and soon-to-be chan­cellor at Washington University, St. Lou­is, has a slightly different take on this is­sue. "People need to recognize that the Ph.D. degree is a research-intensive de­gree, and specialization is, perhaps, un­avoidable in moving to the frontier in an area and executing research related to it," he says. "At the same time, it is quite clear that students need to be prepared for work in several areas throughout their careers. There is some need for broadening, but I would not want to give up the enormous strength that these research degree recipients have in really doing something in great detail about a particular area."

One of the report's general recom­mendations is to acquaint students, as they are moving along in their pro­gram, with what is going on in terms of

McCarty: change is a two-way street

job opportunities and what they might be thinking of in terms of employment after they get a Ph.D. degree.

C. Gordon McCarty, manager of uni­versity relations for Bayer in Pittsburgh and chairman of the ACS Board Com­mittee on Corporation Associates, points out what may be a big problem: "In some chemistry departments, not a single faculty member has ever had ex­perience in industry. So how can they be expected to create a program with that type of flexibility without some help from industry?"

"Change is a two-way street," Mc­Carty continues. "It is incumbent on those of us in industry also to offer more internships for students and sab­baticals for faculty. We've done that, but not to the extent we should. If we say, 'We want you to know more about us, we want you to be better prepared, for you to walk into our doors and be an employee who can start up fast,' then we need to offer experiences so that they can gain relevant experience in a nonacademic environment."

Wrighton says: "I think the internship idea is a great one, and we need to be accommodating in our system. Many students, of course, will want to plow right ahead and get their degree as quickly as possible, but what we've found is that it's taking longer and long­er for people to get degrees anyway."

Time to degree Over the past 30 years, the average

time it takes graduate students to com­plete their doctoral programs has in­creased steadily. One measure—the me­dian time that each year's new Ph.D.s have been registered in graduate school—has increased in some fields by more than 30%, according to the NRC report.

The NRC committee is concerned about the increasing time spent by young scientists and engineers to launch their careers. "Spending time in doctoral or postdoctoral activities might not be the most effective way to use the talents of young scientists and engineers for most employment positions. Further­more, because of the potential financial and opportunity costs, some highly tal­ented people might be discouraged from going into or staying in science and engineering."

The committee hesitated to recom­mend a particular time limit for comple­tion of the Ph.D. or a particular length of

You have a 1 in 8 chance of

Being Disabled. Make sure you'll still be able to pay your bills.

Get ACS disability income insurance, the most important protection you probably don't have.

Yes, 1 in 8. That's your chance of becoming disabled - unable to work for three months or more -in any given year.

What if you're disabled for an entire year - or the rest of your life? How will you keep paying your monthly bills? How quickly will your savings evaporate?

The fact is, most people don't have nearly enough disability income insurance - if any - even though they may well have life insurance. And even though your chance of becoming disabled during your working years is much greater than your chance of dying. At age 32, it's 6.5 times greater!

Becoming disabled may also be more financially devastating than dying, because you have yourself to take care of as well as your family.

That's where ACS Disability Income Insurance comes in. It pays you up to $5,000 of income

a month. And we've harnessed the combined buying power of our members to secure low group rates you may not be able to get on your own.

Even if you get disability insurance through your employer, you probably don't have enough. You'll want to buy additional coverage through ACS, or you may want to simplify things and

buy all your coverage through ACS. Especially since it's under­written by CIGNA, one of America's largest insurers.

If you wait until you need disability income insurance, it'll be too late. Act now to get more information. Send the coupon by mail or fax, use E-mail, or call us.

Because even if you're dis­abled, your income shouldn't be.

Ί

7? BS, I want to make sure my income is protected if I'm disabled. Tell me more about ACS Disability Income Insurance.

95026

Name and Title _ Company Address City, State, Zip Phone Also send me information on: • Term Life Insurance • Hospital Indemnity Insurance Q Accidental Death and Dismemberment Insurance • Supplemental Retirement Program Four ways to respond: Mail: Member Insurance Office American Chemical Society, 1155 16th Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 Fax: (202) 872-4435 E-mail: memins@acs.org Phone: (202) 452-8911 or (202) 872-6037

INSURANCE. PLANS

We Take Care Of Our Own

y* BS, I want to make sure my income is protected if I'm disabled. Tell me more about ACS Disability Income Insurance.

95026

Name and Title _ Company Address City, State, Zip Phone Also send me information on: • Term Life Insurance • Hospital Indemnity Insurance Q Accidental Death and Dismemberment Insurance • Supplemental Retirement Program Four ways to respond: Mail: Member Insurance Office American Chemical Society, 1155 16th Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 Fax: (202) 872-4435 E-mail: memins@acs.org Phone: (202) 452-8911 or (202) 872-6037

INSURANCE. PLANS

We Take Care Of Our Own

EDUCATION

Royal Society of Chemistry report urges broader training The Royal Society of Chemistry's (RSC) Scientific Affairs Board report, "The Chemistry Ph.D.: The Enhance­ment of Its Quality," responds to some of the same concerns that prompted the National Research Council's report, "Reshaping the Graduate Education of Scientists & Engineers." The central message of RSC's report is "broad is best." It draws conclusions from extensive consultation with industrial and aca­demic chemists.

As does the NRC report, the RSC report praises its home system's "out­standing record of achievement in chemical research and training." The RSC board believes that "universities can respond within the existing frame­work for chemical research."

The primary concern that both re­ports deal with is Ph.D. overspecializa-tion. Other concerns addressed by the RSC report include the relatively poor quality and the inadequate professional skills of some Ph.D. graduates.

The RSC board recommends that

Ph.D. students spend about 10% of their time updating themselves on scientific developments outside their specialty. The board encourages stu­dents to broaden their scientific awareness by taking short courses and developing the habit of reading outside their major field.

Ph.D.s must develop transferable skills while in graduate school. Reg­ular written reports and opportuni­ties to teach undergraduate chemistry students are encouraged. The board also encourages departments to give students opportunities to make oral presentations to a range of audienc­es—from workers in other branches of chemistry to the general public.

To ensure that Ph.D. programs in the U.K. graduate only high-quality students, candidates for advanced de­grees need to be involved in continu­ous assessment of their progress. The RSC board says students should have a second mentor to consult for advice and new mentors should be trained and monitored by the university.

postdoctoral study, "partly in recogni­tion of the great diversity of graduate students, disciplinary requirements, and educational institutions, missions." In­stead, it recommends imposition of "clearly understood quantitative guide­lines for Ph.D. completion times [that are] set by individual institutions after discussions among students, faculty, and professional societies.

"Whatever the institutional guide­lines are, they must be implemented, monitored, and enforced to ensure that graduate students are never used to provide inexpensive labor on research projects or in teaching," the report says.

Wrighton doesn't think spending a long time in doctoral study is "in the best interest of those who are making the investment in the education, mainly the public." He says, "Students in sci­ence and engineering today are, in fact, supported, and we see that it's taking increasingly longer to obtain the degree. And people begin their independent ca­reers at a later point in life—not that that is, by itself, necessarily bad, but peo­ple who are going to be on the receiving end of the graduates, namely industry, might be better served by having people come in at an earlier stage.

"I think that the balance of how long it takes to obtain a degree versus pro­viding students with what they need to succeed in life will probably be im­proved if more of the support goes in the form of training grants and individ­ual fellowship awards. In other words, put more resources in the hands of stu­dents and very likely the universities will respond by developing programs and responding to students' needs with initiatives that will be attractive. We're always interested in attracting excellent students, and if they bring their own resources, I think we will have an incentive to work more aggres­sively to provide the kinds of programs that would be most meaningful to them."

Graduate student support The NRC committee says that, al­

though research assistantships provide valuable skills, the needs of funded projects rather than the students' edu­cational needs have tended to drive the students' work. So it says that govern­ment and other agents of financial as­sistance for graduate students should adjust their support mechanisms to in­clude new education/training grants to institutions and departments. Grants

would be awarded competitively to en­hance student versatility both through curriculum innovation and more effec­tive faculty mentoring to acquaint stu­dents with the full range of employ­ment options. Evaluation criteria for these grants would include the propos­er's plan to improve the versatility of students.

Heindel says this "reads like God, motherhood, and the flag until you re­alize that there is willingness to reduce the number of [research assistants] on funded grants and let that money go to the student directly through some na­tional competition. And let that student distribute the funds to where he or she wants to go." He believes that "some faculty would have a great deal of trouble accepting the empowerment of students in this fashion if it were brought about by students having any significant amount of fellowship mon­ey in their hands.

"The faculty members in second- and third-tier schools believe that all the stu­dents now having money would be ac­cepted by the first-tier institutions."

Heindel recalls the deliberations on this issue that took place in his 1994 Presidential Colloquium. "Our group spent time on what the effect of this kind of graduate student support would be: To a person, they had the opinion that it would have the effect of killing off the federally supported stu­dents in the second- and third-tier schools. This is because unless 'Har­vard' agrees to put an absolute cap on its admissions, it could attract students who would come in with their own money and it would take them."

Kostiner adds, "My first reaction to the idea of the federal government's giving grants to departments was neg­ative, and that's because there will be a tendency to load the money into the top tier. Other schools would really suffer. This kind of funding could seri­ously damage really productive faculty at smaller institutions. That's a poten­tial problem. But, on the other hand, if you want to get control of training of Ph.D.s out of the hands of individual faculty members and back into the de­partment or institution, this is one way to do it."

Wrighton says it's been his view for some time that "the balance of support for graduate students has been too heavily skewed to research assistants. The idea of moving to education/train-

50 MAY 29,1995 C&EN

Gain Hands-on Experience in MS!

Enroll today in this intensive short €Ourso ottered by tho American Chemical Society—

Mass Spectrometry Principles and Practice

Michigan State University • East Lansing, Ml Two 1995 Sessions!

Sunday-Friday n Sunday-Friday July 16-21 & July 23-28

You'll Learn: • How to Interpret Mass Spectral Data.

• Which Compounds are Amenable to Various MS Techniques.

• How to Introduce Samples, Collect Data by Scanning, and Process Data with a Data System.

• How to Search on MSD and ITD Data Systems and on Terminals Connected to the Chemical Information Service in Washington, D.C.

• How to Tune a Mass Spectrometer, Maintain it, Introduce Samples, Collect Data by Scanning, and Process Data with a Data System.

• How to Operate a Variety of Benchtop GC/MS, Spectrometers. Each Will be Equipped with an Integrated Data System.

• AND MUCH, MUCH MORE!

Register Today! Enrollment in this exceptionally popular course

is l imited. To register, phone the Continuing

Education Short Course Off ice at (800) 227-

5558 or (202) 8 7 2 - 4 5 0 8 . Or , for addi t ional

informat ion, mail or FAX the coupon.

Tho Instructors J. Throck Watson (Course Director), Professor of Biochemistry and Chemistry, Michigan State University, is an expert in quantitative techniques and methodology of GC/MS.

Plus . . . O. David Sparkman, Douglas A. Cage, and M. Micke

American Chemical Society Dept. of Continuing Education

Meeting Code MAS95 1155 Sixteenth Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036 FAX: (202)872-6336

YES! Please send me a free brochure describing Mass Spectrometry: Principles and Practice, to be held July 16-21, 1995, and July 23-28, 1995, at Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.

Name

Title _

Organization .

Address

City, State, Zip

New from the

Taxai»

Hyphenated Techniques in Polymer Characterization: Thermal-Spectroscopic and Other Methods Covers significant advances in hyphenated techniques in poly­mer characterization. Presents coupled thermal techniques and couple-thermal-spectroscopic techniques, including STA-MS, STA-FTIR, TG/ IR , GC/ IR , TGA/ IR , T B / F T I R , D S C / FTIR, and TGA/FTIR. Theodore Provder, Marek W. Urban, and Howard G. Barth, Editors ACS Symposium Series No. 581 200 pages (1994) Clothbound ISBN 0-8412-3057-9 $54.95

Allelopathy: Organisms, Processes, and Applications Discusses a variety of chemical interactions among plants, in­cluding algae, fungi, bacteria, and higher plants. Includes chapters on allelopathic interac­tions involving specific organ­isms and some of the chemicals isolated during these interac­tions. Covers mechanisms of action of chemicals involved in allelopathy. Includes a section on biological control and direct conversion of compounds for use in agriculture. Illustrates how a better understanding of the allelopathic phenomenon can lead to progress toward more sustainable agricultural systems. Inderjit, Κ. Μ. Μ. Dakshini and Frank A. Einhellig, Editors ACS Symposium Series No. 582 389 pages (1994) Clothbound ISBN 0-8412-3061-7 $99.95

Taxane Anticancer Agents: Basic Science and Current Status Presents an overview of the de­velopment of paclitaxel as an an­ticancer drug, including the discovery, initial development, current status, supply issues, and recent clinical developments. Discusses in detail the cellular mechanism of action and the toxicity of paclitaxel. Presents drug delivery and taxotere me­tabolism. Explains semisyn­thetic and medicinal chemistry studies. Covers approaches to the total synthesis of paclitaxel. Gunda I. Georg, Thomas T. Chen, Iwao Ojima, and Dolatrai M. Vyas, Editors ACS Symposium Series No. 583 376pages (1995) Clothbound ISBN 0-8412-3073-0 $99.95

Hybrid Organic-Inorganic Composites Presents novel research demon­s t ra t ing ways in which the unique properties of organic and inorganic materials can be syn-ergistically combined. Discusses the development of composites with enhanced propert ies through the use of biomimicry and nanostructured materials. Examines the synthesis of com­posites with improved high tem­perature stabil i ty and compounds with greatly in­creased resistance to impact fail­ure. Looks at new materials offering increased electrical con­ductivity, non-linear optical properties, and novel interfacial properties. J. E. Mark, C. Y-C Lee, and P. A. Bianconi, Editors ACS Symposium Series No. 585 430 pages (1995) Clothbound ISBN 0-8412-3148-6 $109.95

i AGR0CHEM1CALSIV

\ Sic w φ

Synthesis and Chemistry of Agrochemicals IV Discusses structure-activity rela­tionships in the design of novel agrochemicals and the use of bioisosteres and natural products as lead structures in discovery of new pest control agents. Pre­sents examples of a variety of discovery rationales being used in biological systems. Examines the use of bioassays as indicators of chemical activity in biologi­cal systems. Details the syn­thetic methodology used in the laboratory preparation of a wide variety of biologically active agrochemicals. Don R. Baker, Joseph G. Fenyes, and Gregory S. Basarab, Editors ACS Symposium Series No. 584 500 pages (1995) Clothbound ISBN 0-8412-3091-9 $129.95

Immunoassays of Agrochemicals: Emerging Technologies Discusses advances in antibody engineering and recognition of small molecules. Focuses on new basic and applied science in hapten and assay chemistry and formats. Explores developing methods that improve sensitiv­ity, allow real-time repeated analyses and mult i -analyte analysis. Provides data valida­tion guidelines and quality stan­dards for immunoassay methods. Includes an introduc­tory chapter by Bruce D. Ham­mock and Shirley J. Gee. Judd 0. Nelson, Alexander E. Karu, and Rosie B. Wong, Editors ACS Symposium Series No. 586 376pages (1995) Clothbound ISBN 0-8412-3149-4 $99.95

ΛβΟΙΙΊ THF ACS' MMPOSIUM ttUSt Scientists around the world view the American Chemical Society as the best single source for published information on chemical research. The ACS Symposium Series offers comprehensive, peer-reviewed books featuring papers presented at recent ACS symposia that cover today's rapidly expanding topics and fields. Additional material — review material, tutorial chapters, and glossaries — is also included to enhance the comprehensiveness of the subject covered.

ACS I I PUBLICATIONS mini Resources for the Chemical Sciences

ORDER TOLL FREE 1-800-227-5558 (in Washington, D.C., 872-4363) and use your credit card! FAX: 202-872-6067. ACS Publications Catalog* now available on internet: tfopber a< sinfo.a< s.oi'U or URI : blip://pubs.a< s.orU

L!>v] - » . J ^ . Λ » "<

EDUCATION

ing grants is an additional element in the mix of the support of advanced ed­ucation and research, and I think it's a good move to make."

Limiting numbers of Ph.D.s The NRC committee says, "There is

little basis for trying to control the pro­duction of new science and engineering Ph.D.s by limiting enrollments national­ly through some central control mecha­nism." It acknowledges the lack of up-to-date information on employment, saying, "With current techniques, it is not possible to forecast the future de­mand for or supply of scientists and en­gineers. . . . In the absence of reliable long-range models, we do not know whether a situation is temporary and self-correcting or whether stronger ac­tion is required."

Heindel says the NRC committee, by declining to recommend limiting the number of Ph.D. students, ducked an important issue. "Not anyone that I have talked to believes, even if we built this flexibility in, even if we make tomor­row's doctoral grad willing and able to tackle international marketing or to teach in public school or to be a technol­ogy-transfer officer in a patent law office, [that] there are enough positions that use the intellectual class content that we've pounded into their brains during the years that they were graduate students."

Wrighton does not support limitation because "It's very difficult to do that in the first place, and no one really should be ar­guing against bringing the educational level of America to a higher plane." He explains, "Our dean of science here says 'America could never have too many highly educated people.' "

Burke sees no value in artificially limiting the numbers of Ph.D.s or in embargoes on foreign students. "In market-driven situations," he says, "it is important that everyone understand early what the standards are for and the likelihood of their success. Gradu­ate schools do a poor job in conveying this information."

The NRC committee also declined to recommend limits on enrollments of non-U.S. citizens. The number of these students enrolled in U.S. graduate schools and the number receiving Ph.D.s have both risen more rapidly man the comparable numbers of U.S. citizens.

According to the report, the number of science and engineering doctorates earned annually by people who are not

U.S. citizens and have temporary visas has increased sharply from 2,096 in 1983 to 5,146 in 1993. This group received 29.1% of the doctorates in 1983 and 42.2% of the doctorates in 1993 and ac­counted for most of the net increase in the number of doctorates awarded since 1986.

"One reason for the marked increase has been a series of political events that have encouraged immigration. The Im­migration Reform Act of 1990 gave visa preference to applicants with science and engineering skills," the report says.

According to NRC, "The number of American students entering science and engineering graduate schools is not ris­ing. There is no evidence that this situa­tion would be changed by limiting [non-U.S.-citizen enrollments]. In fact, artifi­cial limits could have the detrimental effect of disrupting the supply of scien­tists and engineers in key fields."

The committee continues, "The deci­

sion of [non-U.S.] students to seek per­manent jobs in the U.S. increases the tal­ent available to our country, although it adds to the employment-related pressures on advanced scientists and engineers."

Wrighton says, "One does not want to have a top-flight graduate program in an American institution that is only involv­ing students from other countries. That would be inappropriate. On the other hand," he adds, "considering what U.S. citizen students are going to be doing in later life, it is important for them to un­derstand people from other countries— how they work, what their cultures are all about, and to network with them.... I don't think that putting a rigid ceiling on the numbers of non-US. students in Ph.D. science and engineering programs is an appropriate way to address con­cerns about—let's put it bluntly— educating the competition."

Continued on page 63

ACS NEWS

1962 Garvan Medalist celebrates 100th birthday Last Friday, Helen M. § Dyer celebrated her |· 100th birthday. An insti- § tution in her family, as g well as in biochemistry, 3 she spent the past several weeks greeting family members and friends who gathered in Wash­ington, D.C., to mark the event. Dyer, who was awarded the 1962 Garvan Medal for her research in biochemistry, was the first to synthesize an α-amino acid antimetab­olite—S-ethylhomocys-teine, in 1938—although the term antimetabolite had not yet been coined. Dyer's research was the forerunner of an entire new concept in biochem­istry that had a tremendous impact in medicine and the field of sulfa drugs. Among other accomplish­ments, she prepared in 1949 the first comprehensive index of tumor che­motherapy, a factor that helped ini­tiate the National Cancer Institute's chemotherapy program in the 1950s. Dyer received the George Washing­ton University Alumni Achieve­ment Award for biochemical research in cancer in 1958. She received a Ph.D.

degree in biochemistry from George Washington University in 1935.

Dyer formally retired in 1972 (from the National Cancer Institute) but continued to review grants and technical papers until five years ago. She still reads C&EN, follows the DNA evidence being presented at the O. J. Simpson trial, and is learn­ing all about e-mail.

Mairin Brennan

MAY 29,1995 C&EN 53

EDUCATION

Continued from page 53 According to Kostiner, the general

increase in numbers of non-U.S. gradu­ate students may have had the effect of removing Ph.D. production from a supply-demand equation. "If you have a large number of very highly qualified candidates coming from a foreign country, they are not coming here be­cause of the supply-demand equation in the U.S. They are coming here either to further their educations or for immi­gration and they will come no matter what the job situation is."

Wrighton says, "The [NRC] report says that there is anecdotal evidence that students from other countries stay in America. I think it's a lot more than 'anecdotal information.' MIT, for exam­ple, has about 1,000 faculty members, and about a third of the faculty were born in another country. So there is very strong support for outstanding people from other countries making a big contribution to America."

Furthermore, he says, "Through re­source allocation, prudent adjustment of that balance can take place. I don't think it's going to be possible to turn down the number of students who par­ticipate in higher education in America just by decree. The adjustments can be made by shaping some of the policies and the balance of support for students who are in America. There are a lot of fellowship programs now that are for U.S. citizens only."

Kostiner says, "Industrial research managers want to hire the best possible people—and by turning off the supply of [non-U.S.] Ph.D. students, you are turning off a source of outstanding Ph.D.s. But if you talk to a U.S.-citizen Ph.D. who can't find a job, the non-U.S.-citizen Ph.D.s are seen as competition."

Wrighton concludes: "There are go­ing to be many elements of a debate like this, some attached to the rather pressing budget constraints that are on the horizon in connection with support for science and engineering. But I think that the NRC report provides an im­portant outline of many of the issues. It will raise many questions and spark some good debate about how we should move in the future, but it is not the defining document. There are a number of other settings in which these issues will be discussed, but I think it's very thoughtful and addresses impor­tant issues that are on the minds of a lot of people in science now." •

INDEX TO ADVERTISERS IN THIS ISSUE

AlliedSignal, Inc 1 Briechle-Fernandez Marketing Services, Inc.

+BASF Corporation 20 Norman, Lawrence, Patterson & Farrell, Inc.

**BASFAg 35 PWS PromarketWerbeService GmbH & Co.

Bayer Corporation 27

Techmarketing

Calgon Vestal Laboratories, Inc 41

Chevron Chemical Company OBC

Creative Marketing Services, Inc.

+Degussa Corporation 23 Briechle-Fernandez Marketing Services, Inc.

+Dow Corning Corporation 64 Sawyer Riley Compton, Inc.

+Eastman Chemical Company IFC Charles Tombras Advertising

Foster Wheeler 2

Gianettino & Meredith, Inc.

Huntsman Chemical Corporation IBC

*+Lonza, Inc. 32A

Wegman Associates

*+01in Chemicals 32D Marquardt & Roche

+Reilly Industries 19 Alexander Marketing Services, Inc.

Twin Rivers Technologies, Inc 40 ML Strategies, Inc.

"Union Camp Chemical 32B-32C Sherwood & James Advertising Incorporated

+ See ad in Chemcyclopedia. 'Companies so marked appear in the Demo­graphic Edition. **Companies so marked appear in the Non-U.S. edition only.

DIRECTORIES Chemical Exchange 62 Classified Advertising 55-62 Equipment Mart 62 Technical Services 62

J r \ Audit

Advertising Management for the American Chemical Society Publications

CENTCOM, LTD. President

James A. Byrne

Executive Vice President Benjamin W. Jones

Joseph P. Stenza, Production Director Laurence J. Doyle, Director of Marketing

CENTCOM, LTD. 1599 Post Road East P.O. Box 231 Westport, CT 06881-0231 Telephone: (203) 256-8211 Fax No.: (203) 256-8175

DIRECTOR, ADVERTISING SALES Benjamin W. Jones, Exec. VP

Telephone: 610-964-8061 Fax No.: 610-964-8071

ADVERTISING SALES MANAGER Walter H. (Skip) Mongon

Telephone: 203-256-8211 Fax No.: 203-256-8175

MANAGER, NATIONAL ACCOUNTS MARKETING Graham H. Kreicker Telephone: 708-441-6383

Fax No.: 708-441-6382

ADVERTISING PRODUCTION MANAGER Joseph P. Stenza

CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING MANAGER Geri Anastasia

SALES REPRESENTATIVES

Philadelphia, PA .. .Frank Patton, CENTCOM, Ltd., The Meadows, 485 Devon Park Drive, Suite 106, Wayne, PA 19087; Telephone: 610-964-8061; Fax No.: 610-964-8071

New York/New Jersey.. John M. Lucas, Dean A. Baldwin, CENT­COM, Ltd., Schoolhouse Plaza, 720 King Georges Post Roads, Fords, NJ 08863-1925; Telephone: 908-738-8200; Fax. No.: 908-738-6128

Westport, CT/Boston, MA.. .Walter H. (Skip) Mongon, John M. Lu­cas, CENTCOM, Ltd., 1599 Post Road East, P.O. Box 231, West-port, CT 06881-0231; Telephone: 203-256-8211; Fax. No.: 203-256-8175

Cleveland, OH.... Frank Patton, CENTCOM, Ltd., 19035 Old De­troit Road, Suite 203, Rocky River, OH 44116; Telephone: 216-331-5151; Fax. No.: 216-331-3432

Chicago, IL.. .Graham H. Kreicker, Michael J. Pak, CENTCOM, Ltd., 540 Frontage Road, Northfield, IL 60093-1203; Telephone: 708-441-6383; Fax. No.: 708^41-6382

Houston, TX/Atlanta, GA.. .Edward M. Black, CENTCOM, Ltd., P.O. Box 820966, Houston, TX. 77082-0966; Telephone: 713-493-1560; Fax No.: 713493-6673

West Coast/Denver, CO .. .Bob LaPointe, CENTCOM, Ltd., 2672 Bayshore Parkway, Suite 808, Mountain View, CA 94043-1010; Telephone: 415-969-4604; Fax. No.: 415-969-2104

United Kingdom, Scandinavia and Europe (Except: Germany, Switzerland, Austria, France, Italy, and Spain) .. .Malcolm Thiele, Mary Trussler, Wood Cottage, Shurlock Row, Reading, RG10 OQE, England; Telephone: 0734-343-302; Fax. No.: 0734-343-848

France .. .Gerard Lecoeur, Aidmedia, 31-33 Grand rue de Saint-Rambert, 69009 Lyon, France, Telephone: 78-64-20-37; Fax No.: 78^83-56-67

Germany, Switzerland, Austria.. .IMP, InterMedia Partners GmbH, Deutscher Ring 40, 42327 Wuppertal, Germany; Telephone: 0202-711091; Fax. No.: 0202-712431

Italy, Spain.. .Tess Serranti, Serranti Communications, 43 Van Sant Road, New Hope, PA 18938; Telephone: 610-598-0668; Fax No.: 610-598-0670

Japan.. .Shigeyuki Yasui, Intercommunications (Japan), Inc., 2F Gin-za Eiwa Bldg. 8-18-7 Ginza, Chuo-Ku, Tokyo 104 Japan; Tele­phone: (03) 5565-0861; Fax No.: (03) 5565-0860

Hong Kong .. .SEAVEX, Ltd., 503 Wilson House, 19 Wyndham Street, Central, Hong Kong, Telephone: 868-2010, Fax No.: 810-1283

Singapore.. .SEAVEX, Ltd., 400 Orchard Road, #10-01 Orchard Tow­ers, Singapore 0923, Telephone: 734-9790, Fax No.: 732-5129

Korea .. .DooBee International, Ltd., Center Building (Byulgwan), 1-11 Jeong-dong, Choong-ku C.P.O. Box 4557, Seoul, Korea, Telephone: 822-776-20%, Fax No: 822-755-9860

Taiwan... Epoch Ltd., 2F No. 3, Lane 52, Nanking East Road, Section 4, P.O. Box 1642, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC, Telephone: 577-5441, Fax No.: 5784308

South America.. CENTCOM, Ltd., The Meadows, 485 Devon Park Drive, Suite 106, Wayne, PA 19087; Telephone: 610-964-8061; Fax No.: 610-964-8071

MAY 29,1995 C&EN 63