Becoming a scientist

I fail to see why anyone should be surprised that 12-year-olds who have an interest in science are much more likely than others to go on to become scientists (C&EN, July 10, page 73). ACS members need only ask themselves at what age they became interested in chemistry or maybe just science in general. I have been doing this at random at ACS meetings over the past 20 years.

For one person, it was age 15; another, age 12. I remember these people because they were extremely unusual. The majority had their interest sparked at age six, seven, eight, or nine, with most being seven or eight. Somewhat surprising is that responses of age five or younger are more frequent than those at double-digit ages. One person insisted they had always wanted to be a chemist. How far back could they remember? That turned out to be age three.

One need only ask our current ACS president, E. Ann Nalley, as I did this year, to find out that she decided on a career in science at age four. In my case, the decision was made at age seven. In many cases, people remember the triggering event. For me, it was a book on astronomy. I have been reading about science ever since. This was not without problems.

My lack of interest in reading the typical third-grade literature was noted. My mother told the teacher I read all the time. I was ordered to read books of my own choosing from the home library and write book reports. My father's college chemistry textbook, a book on weather forecasting, and one on construction of the Panama Canal were the subjects of some of my first book reports. It was the first time I ever did anything interesting for school. The periodic table would always be more interesting than anything Dick and Jane might do.

I have a theory about why things are this way. The actual teaching of science in grade school is very shallow. Only those who are self-motivated will make progress at getting an education in science. These are the same people who will automatically be taking all the science classes in high school. In college, these people will have a huge advantage over those whose only exposure to science is in the formal classes of the education system.

This is where "chemistry is a hard subject" enters the picture. Chemistry has always been the easy subject for me. A recent student whose only exposure to chemistry was in high school three years before was failing even with maximum effort. For this student, college-level chemistry was not just a hard subject, it was baffling. They are not going on in science. The ones who are going on in science (and becoming ACS members) are the ones that had an interest in the subject at an early age.

By the way, my parents wanted me to be an engineer. It certainly can't be genetic. Chemistry was my worst subject in college. Exposure to a subject is one thing; motivation and interest are another.

John Gerlach
Las Vegas

It can be expected that an interest in science at early age will be one of the predictors of getting a science degree, but the number of people who actually graduate with a science degree from the non-interest group is greater than from the interest group. So the interesting question is what drove that non-interest group to pursue science?

The number of U.S. graduates in sciences increased by about 50% from 1970 to 1995 (Science 2006, 312, 1143). Coinciding with that was presumably an increase in job growth. During the past 10 years, U.S. chemical jobs declined by 18% (C&EN, July 10, page 56), coinciding with the decline in the number of graduates. What better correlation do we need? It is to be noted that this happened in spite of increased spending by U.S. companies and also in sharp contrast to global chemical job growth. Clearly, the issue is jobs, because many actually switched their careers from science because of this during the past 10 years.

We should focus on funding small-scale chemical industries, promoting local research and employment, and linking every chemistry program with industrial apprenticeship, thereby retaking global leadership in research and providing more value and quality to graduating chemists. How many people were inspired to become high school teachers only to quit within a few days of badgering by students? Reality of life is more powerful than role models.

Gopal Subramaniam
Flushing, N.Y.

The authors of most letters in the July 3 issue (page 4) were concerned about the lack of chemistry majors. Not all students have to major in chemistry to benefit the profession. However, all legislators, governors, the President, and the voters should know some chemistry. "The Extraordinary Chemistry of Ordinary Things" by Carl H. Snyder is a good textbook to interest students in the chemistry of everyday life and to make them better informed voters.

James F. Jackson
Carlisle, Ind.