> If the division and ACS as a whole claim to hold diversity, equity, and inclusion as important principles, I would expect to hear the leaders who have espoused those principles defend them, and I hope to hear that soon.

> 

There have been a wide variety of perspectives shared over the last few days on this issue, some well grounded in either relevant experiences or systematic research, others not so much. I agree that diversity, equity, and inclusion relates to cross-generational concerns as well as other identity issues, and that these issues have a direct impact on both practical safety and the safety culture of the chemistry profession.

So I appreciate Jack asking for CHAS to address this concern. With that in mind, I don’t speak for the Division, only for myself. I would also note that the Committee on Chemical Safety is the group that speaks on behalf of ACS as a whole on these topics.

With this in mind, I have the following observations:

- With regard to "The degree has lost its meaning unless it is granted only to those who can demonstrate the ability to handle the subject and do the work,” I don’t think that a Bachelor’s Degree ever had that meaning. My family history is a piece of evidence for this opinion.

My maternal grandfather got a Bachelor’s degree in engineering from Cornell University in the 1920’s. Looking at his report cards, this degree was based primarily on gentleman’s C’s. In addition to his classwork, he had many extra-curricular activities, which did not include working for money. So I don’t think undergraduate classes were his top priority, but he went on to a successful academic career in mechanical engineering, with several seminal texts in the field of vibration control.

My father also got a degree from Cornell in the 1950’s, in animal husbandry. He left his original major of dairy science due to his experience in chemistry classes (p-chem to be precise). He did fine without this chemistry as part of his education, ending up as a secondary school science teacher after an injury while he was working with cows.

I got a degree from Cornell in the 1970’s with one course from the Chemistry Department. As a geology BS and environmental engineering MS, I took many environmental chemistry courses from other departments. My lack of any other Chemistry courses did not impact my learning in those courses or in my subsequent career in hazmat chemistry. (I would note one impact on my career: I benefited from the fact that I am not eligible to work for OSHA because of it requires that its IH’s have an organic chemistry class on their transcript. Fortunately, the CIH designation does not have the requirement.)

My paternal grandfather did not graduate from high school, but spent 30 years in an hands-on industrial chemistry research lab tech role in the Niagara Falls chemistry industry. He clearly had the most chemistry expertise of the 4 of us, but he did it without o-chem, p-chem or any other chem, besides a 1918 high school chemistry text, which I still have. (My grandmother did get breast cancer in the 1950’s, which was rather unusual, but whether that was living in Niagara Falls or from washing his work clothes is uncertain. Based on what I read in the chemical history literature, it’s unlikely a chemistry class would have protected her from either source.)

The point is that “the degree” has never had one meaning, either in terms of competence or accomplishment.

- We need our students’ future employers to come to us and tell us what they look for in students and what they see as missing, and that rarely happens

On this front, there is happy news. Last week (I believe) the 4th ACS Safety Summit addressed this question specifically, bringing together employers and educators of chemists to better define what chemical safety skills are important in the 21st Century workplace. I hope that we will see a report from this summit in 2023.

- I don’t understand the concept of academic rigor. I have taught courses on 5 different topics to graduate and undergraduates at all levels for a total of probably 20 semesters altogether.

I am fortunate to have had very few of the disappointing experiences with students that Rob described. That is partially because the courses I have taught have been based on educational objectives I developed with my co-teachers. So, I was able to implement evaluation processes in these courses were designed to identify success rather than failure. These included a course that awarded the 40 hour HAZWOPER certificate to students and I was able to get direct feedback from the employers who employed graduates from the course. It was consistently positive.

It’s true that some students don’t succeed in some courses (I have given 3 F’s over the years). However, statistically, I have had more success with the students I have worked with than with people who I have worked on professional projects with. (I have been fortunate in both regards that the success rate has been in the B-plus range.)

My thanks to everyone who has contributed to this thread on an important issue. Education is changing as rapidly as every other part of our profession and we need to continuously work to understand those changes so that we can adapt as this process goes forward, either with us or without us.

- Ralph

Ralph Stuart, CIH, CCHO

ralph**At_Symbol_Here**rstuartcih.org

---

For more information about the DCHAS-L e-mail list, contact the Divisional membership chair at membership**At_Symbol_Here**dchas.org

Follow us on Twitter @acsdchas