H To what extent is the UK able to attract talented young scientists and engineers into chemistry research? Is there evidence that they are being nurtured and supported at every stage of their caree

5.H To what extent is the UK able to attract talented young scientists and engineers into chemistry research? Is there evidence that they are being nurtured and supported at every stage of their career?

Members of the Panel spoke to a large number of ECR scientists at every institution visited and, overall, found them to be a high-quality and productive group. However not surprisingly there was considerable variation in the responses relevant to the issues posed in this Framework Question. The Panel found widespread and vastly heterogeneous dissatisfaction with the plethora of fellowship and other schemes used in part to recruit ECRs in the UK. 

The Panel was presented with anecdotal evidence that the number of undergraduate students studying Chemistry has increased significantly over the past 5 years and that the quality of these students in terms of the standard metrics had also improved significantly. In addition there appeared to be a corresponding increase in graduate students but the Panel was unable to verify this. At one institution it was stated that 40% of the PhD graduates went directly into industrial positions, with the balance taking postdoctoral fellowships or, in limited numbers, positions outside professional chemistry. None of the many industrial representatives the Panel met with indicated that there was a shortage of chemistry graduates (at any degree level) and from the opposite perspective none of the academic presentations indicated that there was a large over production of chemistry graduates. (The student's perspective on this matter was not solicited systematically.)

Another concern is the emphasis on time limits for PhD students rather than requiring a PhD to be based on accomplishments. This was also discussed in the ‘Whitesides’ Review. Although in some cases changes have been introduced with the goal of extending the funding of student stipends to four years, there were reports that indicated problems with such extensions, for example, issues regarding the consistency with which these restrictions were applied. The Doctoral Training Centres (DTC) programme (with a well organised four year curriculum) address this aspect to some extent, although the dedication of the first year of a DTC appointment to more generalised training and education (including some rotation through several research laboratories) still leaves only three years for the post-graduate students to commit to their thesis research and writing. Furthermore, any programme where the timing is process driven instead of accomplishment driven may have unintended consequences on the quality of the research accomplished and the development of the students as creative research scientists. Given that there is little room for failure in a time-limited thesis project there could be a reluctance to take risks in choice of research problems.

Several industrial representatives were queried regarding their view of the Chemistry PhDs they hired. Response to this question was mixed. In one case, the individual asked clearly stated that the UK students are not as well prepared or as mature as those from other EU countries, especially, the Netherlands or Germany. Other representatives did not seem to be as concerned. In a discussion with a group of industrialists, the need for PhDs that are more broadly educated was expressed. In particular, problem solving skills, mathematical skills, communication skills and judgment skills were emphasised.

The Panel’s view is that the common international standard for awarding of a PhD degree is based on a marked achievement in research. This seems to run counter to the UK's practice of a PhD award after completion of a thesis in a prescribed time period of 3 to 4 years, which is short compared to that in some, but not all competitor countries. The Panel notes that a mandated (short) period likely inhibits the pursuit of adventurous, and hence risky projects, as well as the pursuit of the most challenging research at the interface of disciplines. The mandated short period also limits the student's exposure to problem solving opportunities and independent scientific growth.

In many countries, it is typical for new PhD graduates intending an academic career to immediately assume a postdoctoral research position, usually at a leading academic laboratory or national facility. For UK students this is particularly critical owing to the short duration of the PhD degree programme and a number of the ECRs interviewed had either been in one postdoctoral laboratory for a lengthy period or had held several postdoctoral appointments.

Commonly, the next stage in the UK seems to be an appointment to a position as either a junior lecturer or to a highly competitive longer term (EPSRC or RS) Research Fellowship. A similar stage in Germany would have the individual in one of the new "junior professorships' or as a habilitation candidate, both temporary positions. In the US, the appointment would be as an assistant professor in a tenure track position. In both of the latter positions, considerable resources are provided by the institution: laboratory renovations and funds for equipment and supplies (typically $0.5-1M or more in the US), access to graduate students supported by teaching assistantships, released time from teaching, etc.

By comparison, the institutional support of ECR scientists in the UK is dramatically less, although it is quite variable. It appears that some institutions give very little, while others are more generous, providing access to one or more students and support for supplies and equipment, although nowhere near the levels seen in the US. Of even more concern to the Panel is the range of different appointments given the various flavours of fellowships (spanning 2-10 years), some of which come with considerably more support than others.

The strength of the UK system is that these ECR fellows have considerable freedom to pursue the research directions of their choice. However, a weakness is that the overwhelming majority of research fellows seemed to imagine they were effectively in tenure track situations, which for the most part was evidently not the case; it is a further weakness that the funding structure for ECRs in these positions discourages them from tackling high risk projects.

5.H.5 To what extent is the UK able to attract overseas chemists to the UK? Is there evidence of ongoing engagement either through retention within the UK research community or through international linkages?
There are some recent examples of exceptional scientists that have been recruited from overseas back to the UK; an observation that seems to indicate many UK institutions have the flexibility to compete albeit selectively on the international scene.