The basis for this portion of the discus sion of honors programs is a collection of facts and opinions from 50 chemistry departments in liberal arts colleges. The term honors is taken to include any pro- grams devised for the ablest students of chemistry. In June, 1961, a questionnaire was sent to 65 independent liberal arts colleges, and 50 of these replied in time for the symposium.' Of the group, 35 have ACS certified departments of chemistry and 15 do not. Almost all have fewer than 1000 students and all cooperated in the Wooster study in 1959.=

No statistical conclusions should be drawn from this small, biased sample, and only afewfigures are presented. The purpose was not to survey American college research, which has been well done in the recent Wooster report, hut to gather facts and opinions as a basis for discussion. The author is indebted to many colleagues for their de- tailed, thoughtful, and very helpful replies:

William B. Guenther University of the South

Sewanee, Tennessee

?.

Albright, Allegheny, Amherst, Antioch, Baldwin-Wallace, Bates, Bellarmine, Beloit, Beres, Birmingham-Southern, Bow- doin, Carleton, Centenary, Centre, University of Chattanooga, Coe, Colgate, Colorado College, Denison, DePauw, Dickenson, Esrlham, Franklin and Marshall, Grinnell, Hampden-Sydney, Harvey Mudd, Haverford, Hiram, HobarbSmith, Junirtta, Kalamamo, King's, Lawrence, Lynchhnrg, Middlebury, Mon- mouth, Muhlenberg, Oherlin, Reed, Saint Olaf, University of the South, Swarthmore, Trinity, Washington and Lee, Wesleyan, Wheaton (Ill.), Williams, Wilrnington, Wittenberg, Wooster.

"Research and Teaching in the Liberal Arts College," a report of the Wooster Conference, 1959. Available from Hamy F. Lewis, Institute of Psper Chemistry, Appleton, Wisconsin, and John D. Reinheimer, College of Wooster, Wooster, Ohio.

Chemistry Honors Programs

in Liberal Arts Colleges

48 have some type of honors work; all agree that some student research is desirable.

9 allow freshmen, 10, sophomores, 28, juniors, and 48, seniors to do honors work or research.

23 departments have arranged summer research for their students.

40 regard the honors program as successful. 11 believe freshmen capable of doing research.

The aims and benefits of student research are too obvious to argue. However, for completeness, the unique features of undergraduate research should be listed:

Research involves the student actively in learning. Because of the essentially passive nature of our class- lecture system, his project may be the student's first academic experience in learning by himself.

Devising experiments to find out new things about nature brings the student to the essence of scientific activity as his class work does not.

Pragmatically, it works. Students are fired with enthusiasm and invigorated a t a stage in their careers when continued laboratory exercises may dull their interest in science.

Timing of Student Research

A major question is that of timing: How early and how extensively should the undergraduate be turned loose on laboratory projects outside the regular course work? With the pressure to add inorganic, instru- mental, and other courses to the already tight curricu- lum, time for research is hard to find. This may be most acutely felt in the liberal arts colleges, where dis- tribution requirements for graduation may be extensive.

1 18 / lournal of Chemical Fducofion

The natural answer for nearly half the colleges in this survey has come with the NSF Undergraduate Research Participation Grants for summer work. This seems an ideal solution. The students can put in full days of laboratory and library work without the class inter- ruptions that make continuity of school-year work difficult. Where this has been tried, both student and faculty enthusiasm for it is high. A very important device in summer work has been the weekly conferences of the whole group to discuss the progress of the re- search and to clarify questions for the students. The student's new-found enbhusiasm is soon transferred to others in the college, a powerful stimulus to small schools.

Wide variation is seen in the class level of participat- ing students. Only one-fifth of the departments allow freshmen to start project work. About half took a negative view of freshmen research, saying that it is premature, or, at best, less valuable than the course work they need. In the panel discussion after this Symposium, it became clearer that the advocates of freshman "research" mean a very simple, and limited type of project work and agree that true research by all but the rarest college freshman is out of the question because he lacks the needed knowledge of chemistry, equipment, and literature.

Time for research may increasingly become available if more exceptional students are able to achieve ad- vanced placement, releasing a year of their college chemistry time. Many respondents noted a recent improvement in their studentas' preparation. Much of the credit is again due the NSF whose extensive and effective teacher institutes have grown from 2 in 1953 to 398 in 1961; they reached 18,000 high school teachers in the summer of 1961. With well prepared teachers in high schools, it is not surprising that advanced place- ments in chemistfry have increased each year. College teachers might help in encouraging high school teachers to attend the institutes and to offer sufficient science to prepare students for advanced placement.

Selection of Students

The methods of selection of students to do project work seem to vary widely, but the differences may not be so great if the requirements stated are flexible in ap- plication. In the small college the student will be well enough known to the faculty to make a rigid grade re- quirement unnecessary. This is proper because the student's active interest is the first requirement for re- search. Any student of chemistry in good standing should have the chance to work on an individual project if he really wants to. The experience has been a true awakening to his science for many a previously mediocre chemistry major. Indeed, if this much individual con- sideration is denied the student, the small college can- not make much case for its existence.

Reed College has long required a senior thesis on original research of all its chemistry majors. Others now giving research experience t,o all chemistry majors are Bellarmine, Harvey Mudd, Haverford, Juniata, and Wooster.

Attracting Qualifled Students

Another problem is that of attracting qualified stu- dents to the college and to science. This is a big topic

fit for another symposium, yet honors work is out of the question without a fairly steady supply of good stu- dents. One factor on which the faculty can operate is the public relations of the college. The small school which rarely has spectacular athletic events or numerous faculty currently in cabinet posts, must take care to keep the public aware of its existence and activities. A vigorous public relations office is essential if the small college is to compete for talented students who need to be shown the unique advantages for them of the good small college. This can be done through the press and through the alumni of the college. Teachers should be sure that all news of research, student achievements, new contracts, facilities, and programs is sent in clear detail to the public relations office. Several chemistry departments keep in touch with their graduates through a yearly report of chemical and personal news. At least one department head has sent notes to the high school teachers of students who have done well in their college chemistry. These efforts may help continue the flow of good students to the colleges.

Nature and Pitfalls of Honors Programs

In the foregoing paper Dr. Willeford said, "Each college has the obligation to design its own program in accordance with its own needs." Enthusiastic young instructors often plan very extensive programs that are found to be beyond the abilities of staff and students for reasons of time if not also because they are educationally inappropriate. As one who has fallen in many a pit dug by unrealistic expectations, this author can write with sympathy of these pitfalls. Major ones are over- estimating the time that students can give to research while taking many courses, and overestimating the readiness of undergraduates to use advanced theory. Some reading in education and psychology, especially Whitehead's The Aims of E d u c a t i ~ n , ~ might help those who fall for the superficially logical plan of teaching mostsly theory first so that the students will understand the facts of nature when they meet them, later. This is sadly backwards. Poor results are almost assured with young students if one does violence to Whitehead's "Rhythm of Education" with its cycles of romance, precision, and generalization. Teachers must be care- ful to supply the romance of chemistry missing in many necessarily condensed texts. The enjoyment of knowl- edge and discovery should permeate both course and project work if talented students are to he attracted and retained and if the liberal arts tradition is to be ful- filled.

Most students cannot, even with the best of inten- tions, find time for extra work especially now that in- creased selectivity has augmented competition and quality of work demanded in most courses. Most schools questioned, therefore, give credit for their projects and thus reduce the student's course load.

A major deterrent to expansion of student project activity is the great demand on faculty time to direct this work. College students can rarely work long on

a WHITEHEAD, ALFRED NORTH, "The Aims of Education," The Macmillan Company, New York, 1929. Also republished as s. Mentor Book, The New American Library of World Litera- ture, Inc., New York, 1949.

Volume 39, Number 3, March I962 / 119

their own without meeting problems requirmg assist- ance from a more experienced researcher. The uni- versities have been able to assign undergraduates to projects supervised by graduate students in chemistry. The college professor, however, who encourages all able students to undertake research may find himself inun- dated. An interesting solution appears in the plan being tried at Hampden-Sydney College. Outstanding freshmen and sophomores may begin research as ap- prentices to juniors and seniors who have had experi- ence on the project. A continuing chain of apprentice- ship should relieve the professor of much routine instruc- tion on equipment and technique, which would usually require yearly repetitions.

Other plans to help the busy teacher find time for research are given in the Wooster Report, p. 20-22.$

A Typical Honors Program

It may be of value to record what seems to be the typical honors or project program in 1961 in colleges. After two or three years of college chemistry, the student asks to work on a laboratory project, usually allied to the research of one of the staff. This he will do one or two afternoons a week and in any extra time he can find. In many schools now, he will he able to continue the work in the summer on the NSF grant plan for pay. He will usually receive academic credit for the in-term part of the work and present a thesis or semi- nar on his results. The staff may then certify him (usu- ally after further examinations) for honors on his di- ploma a t graduation, With many variations, this de- scribes the programs at most colleges which the Wooster Report classed as productive of chemists.

A number of experimental programs and new ideas show the range of activities that may affect the honors program indirectly. Wesleyan University pnts a his- tory of chemistry reading course in summer: "In the fall of their senior year, all majors in chemistry must pass an examination in the history of chemistry based on reading assigned to them for the preceding summer."

There may be many more possihilities for self-teaching by students.

A combined chemistry-physics course for freshmen is being tried at Beloit, Amherst, Carleton, Hiram, Lawrence, and Wabash. Juniata is centering its first course on the covalent bond and organic chemistry. Sophomores may then be able to work on organic proj- ects. The widespread experimentation in chemistry cur- ricula permits optimism about the continued vitality of college teaching. The factor of refreshment of the fac- ulty may be as important as the effect of the curriculum itself on students. The success of research is due to the feeling of students and staff that it is both important and very enjoyable.

No Substitute for Enthusiasm

As stated in the report of the Bucknell conference4 in 1960, the details of the chemistry program are "not so important as the catalytic effect of the good teacher." This has been amply documented in many studies. The school, large or small, which fosters little personal interaction between faculty and students will quite generally show a productivity of scientists near zero. Professor Henry A. Bent of Minnesota put it well in his comments on the author's questionnaire: "such a program (honors) exists whenever a group of eager and qualified students is placed in contact with an instruc- tor who is blessed with similar traits and who has a penchant for humanizing knowledge." Harry F. Lewis in the Wooster Report (p. 64-6W has stressed the importance of the teacher who has the research ap- proach even where money, equipment., and time are lacking for much formal laboratory research.

With enthusiastic and qualified teachers any con- venient plan of individual student work can succeed; u~ithout such teachers, no plan is likely to succeed.

"Report of the Bucknell Conference on Undergraduate Trainine of Chemistrv Maiors." Bucknell Universitv. Lewis- - " , ". burg, Pit. See CLAPP, LEALLYN B., AND WILLEFORD, BENNET R., THIS JOURNAL, 38, 251 (1961).

120 / Journal of Chemical Education