Confchem 2000

Responses to questions from Don Rosenthal on the paper "Igniting students....."

Donald Rosenthal has - as always - provided some perceptive questions. Here are my responses to Don's questions, which are shown in blue.

Hugh Cartwright.

SQ1. In your paper you state: "Part I terms are short and exceptionally intense (each of the three terms per year lasting just eight weeks)" What do the students do during the remaining twenty-eight weeks of the year?

Like any students, those at Oxford spend the vacation working to support themselves, going on holiday, doing academic work, and doing nothing at all.

However, almost every Oxford Chemistry Tutor will set a substantial amount of work to be completed by students during the vacation. There is a real risk that, during long breaks, students may forget what they have learned during the previous term. Vacation work is an attempt to reduce this memory drain, and is often followed by a "College Collection", which is a beginning of term exam set specifically for students at the Tutor's own College. Students who mess up such an exam can expect some gentle pressure from their Tutor during the following term.......

SQ2. You indicate that 98% to 99% of the Oxford students who complete Part I take Part II (research). At some U.S. schools only certain students are invited to apply for senior thesis - those students who the faculty believe would benefit from such an experience (and not overly tax the personnel and facilities available). Do you believe that ALL Oxford students are best served by undertaking Part II? Also, are the faculty best served by working with such students?

It is hard to imagine that every student in a class approaching two hundred would benefit from the research, though most undoubtedly do. Students can leave without taking Part II, but then to have only an unclassified degree is a powerful deterrent. Further, even amongst those students for whom research holds limited interest most would rather stay on for another year, just for the pleasure of being at University!

Overall I'd guess that at least 90% of students feel that staying on for Part II is worthwhile, though it is not always the chance to do research which is the main motivating factor.

Turning to the faculty: those faculty who take students are presumably in favour of the scheme, since, in general, faculty are not forced to accept students. However, approval of Part II in general does not mean that one is always happy with the performance of individual Part II students. If a student is uninterested (unusual) or less than committed (somewhat more common) taking that student can seem a mistake. In my group about one student in twenty fails to do a decent job, occasionally because they are not up to the software programming required, but generally because they have more interesting things to do outside the lab.

The occasional poor student is an annoyance, but does not reduce the overall value of Part II significantly.

SQ3. You mention that "Oxford produces more recruits for merchant banks and stockbrokers than any other chemistry department in the country."

a. What fraction of your students go on to work for higher degrees in chemistry? What fraction go directly to chemical industry after receiving the four year degree?

The fraction who go directly into industry is modest; most of those who end up in industry do so after taking a doctorate. The destinations of students on graduation is roughly as follows:

Higher degree in chemistry 45%

Financial Services 16%

Commerce 14%

Manufacturing Industry 10%

Further training for professions (law, medicine, teaching, etc) 8%

Information Technology 6%

Other 1%

The figure for IT is probably now much higher - the figures above are two or three years old.

b. Of those who do go on in chemistry, what fraction remain at Oxford?

The competition to stay on here is fairly strong. We probably take about 40 of our own graduates into the doctorate programme each year; another 40 or so move to another University to carry on.

c. Do some students stay on and work for the same faculty member they did their Part II research with? Do some continue on the same project they started as undergraduates?

Yes, many students stay with the same supervisor. However, few work on a continuation of their project. This is because Part II projects are generally designed to be complete in themselves, so should be wrapped up by the end of a successful Part II. However, in most cases the experimental, theoretical or programming skills developed in Part II remain relevant to the second degree.

d. How well does the Oxford education prepare chemistry students who go on as bankers or stockbrokers? Do they take courses in economics, accounting, etc. as undergraduates?

How well do we prepare students for careers in commerce? Depends who you ask. We teach no directly relevant course at all. A combined Business Studies/Chemistry course has been mooted but never approved.

The reasons why so many of our students go into finance seem to be:

a) The quality of student intake is generally high. High-profile Universities in any country attract strong academic students, and these Universities in turn have a particular attraction for employers.

b) Merchant banks, stockbrokers, accountancy firms and the like may take only a few graduates each year. They will not interview at many Universities if they want only a couple of graduates, so they tend to go to Cambridge, Oxford, Imperial, Bristol and one or two others in the UK. Consequently, their employees tend to be drawn mainly from those Universities. Is this unhealthy? No comment.

c) The nature of the tutorial system at Oxford is important, in that it encourages students to be articulate and to "think on their feet". Those in the financial world seem to value this ability.

d) Some would argue that the "Old Boys Network", which probably exists in mutated form in every country, means that those already in the business will preferentially hire students from their Alma Mater. I have no way of knowing how important this is, but it would be naive to imagine it is never a consideration.

Have you ever polled these former students to determine what recommendations they might make for changes in the curriculum?

Only informally, and in an unscientific way. Responses from my own students tend to be varied and not very useful. What one student commends, another condemns.

SQ4. Do Oxford chemistry undergraduates receive any financial support for their Part II research?

Whatever funding the students have received from their Local Education Authority (which used to meet essentially all University costs, but now meets only a proportion) will continue during the fourth year. Students receive no extra funding from department or faculty member, apart from occasional support to attend a conference or to meet the cost of a period of research spent at another laboratory. They are not paid a salary or stipend.

SQ5. You state that " . . British degrees have until recently lasted only three (years)" Is it possible for an Oxford undergraduate to begin graduate work after completing three years and obtaining an unclassified degree?

Technically yes, if another University chose to offer a place. It is hard to imagine that any University would do this in chemistry if the student had decided that Part II was not of interest, but the student might be offered a place to do IT or another science subject.

SQ6. "The timetable for selecting a supervisor (Table 1) provides half an academic year for students to meet faculty and discuss . . projects . ." I assume this occurs while students are taking courses and tutorials. Do students spend much time independently researching the different projects and talking to supervisors and their students?

This sounds as if you are visualising the students going to the library to look up relevant literature. A few students will do this (but as much as anything in an attempt to impress the potential supervisor). Most students spend quite a bit of time investigating supervisors and projects. They may talk in depth to perhaps twenty supervisors and to members of their groups. In contrast, a few students will put off any investigation until the last minute, then realise they can't see all the supervisors they might be interested in.

SQ7. You indicate that students are expected to select a first and possibly a second and third choice of supervisor and each supervisor can accept a maximum of four students. What fraction of the students obtain their first choice?

This year, 74% students were accepted by their 1st choice

What fraction of the students obtain their first or second choices?

86% were accepted by 1st or 2nd choice.

What fraction of the students are not accepted by any of their three choices and must reapply?

8% students were not accepted by any of their three choices.

Does this process affect student or faculty morale?

Being rejected by all three choices is depressing. In the past I have had the occasional student in my office in tears claiming that they could only make a success of their fourth year with Prof X and s/he had turned them down. I point out that, as far as I am aware, projects are equally successful (or unsuccessful) and students equally happy (or miserable) whether or not the supervisor was on the student's original list.

However, this does not diminish the sense of failure among those students who have not been immediately accepted. Most of those who "fall through" the list have chosen three very popular supervisors; if the student is not accepted by their first choice, there is little prospect that they will be accepted by later choices, since by then the groups will be full.

We have tried various ways of getting around this, for example by allowing students to make up to five choices. This turned out to be counterproductive: some students were then turned down by five choices, and the sense of failure became even more extreme. We have considered a system incorporating a number of "rounds", each consisting of a single choice. However, if students are allowed a choice, it seems inevitable that some will be disappointed several times before finding a suitable supervisor.