EDITORIAL

Minding the chemistry store Science and profession may be falling

short of their responsibilities to the future

We continue to hear expressions of concern that too few students are choosing careers

in chemistry. The view comes from both the academic and the industrial. Is the curriculum in chemistry, as some contend, so tough that only the most determined are willing to undertake it? Is lack of academic-industrial rapport and under­standing an influence? Have academic trends toward more theoretical course work, as well as the emphasis on "pure" science, cast doubts on the relevance of chemistry to what the student generation considers the important problems of our society? One can find support for all these contentions.

At the recent ACS Biennial Conference on Education it was observed that little descriptive chemistry remains in much of the course work. There was a response that if more good descrip­tive material were offered from industry it would be used. Neither half of the argument is much good, each side showing a willingness for some­one else to be responsible. Somebody has to have his heart in it.

When a would-be raconteur starts out, "I'm sure I can't tell this well, but it was awfully funny when I heard it," you know you're in for a poor story. Similar results occur when chemical theory is related to the practical by an academic lecturer who obviously considers applied chem­istry something for tradesmen. Nothing better is accomplished when industry hands up a little warmed-over technology as a gesture to tell the student about life in industry, while being sure to give no idea of what is really going on.

There is opportunity just now, in a climate of

reduced federal support, for a closer relation­ship—provided each side can approach the situa­tion with an honest interest in the problems of the other. Improving the situation would be a worthwhile contribution to our muddled society. Even where there is the will, too few who have the basis for understanding the problem are doing enough.

In another area, Dr. John W. Gardner, former Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, now chairman of the Urban Coalition, has had some comments worth thought in relation to our chemical career problems. Noting that business has made greater contributions to solving urban problems than has labor, and far more than have the universities, he comments that there is con­fusion. Some things these groups have been urged to do are silly, he says. "They have to learn how to contribute." He says that univer­sities have been relatively passive, as have the professions. "If the universities and professionals and businessmen are all to say that the prob­lems are not theirs, then you are faced with the question of who is minding the store," declares Dr. Gardner.

Is the chemistry store being well minded with an attitude of responsibility for what it offers for the future of the profession and its place in society?

OCT. 14, 1968 C&EN 5