Fwd: Re: FW: [Ifeffit] Undergraduates and EXAFS
Thanks for the references, Anatoly! And, what the heck, I might as well give my opinion on the general topic. While the referee's argument is understandable, I think there are few "physics" fields in which undergrads can make greater contributions than in the characterization of materials using EXAFS. I think that to be good at using EXAFS, a researcher must have very strong general research skills. For example, they have to be able to read the literature, communicate in both directions with those in other fields (e.g., chemists), visualize, be able to distinguish real effects from noise, be able to devise tests to establish the cause of observed effects, etc.. The technique itself requires a substantial learning curve; 80 hours seems about right to be able to =begin= to use it productively. But not a lot of specific Ph.D., or even advanced undergraduate, material is required. How could it be? Although a lot of EXAFS experts were trained in physics, we're seeing more who come out of a variety of disparate fields. And you, Bruce, and others have offered EXAFS short courses for years. So this makes it perfect for a talented undergraduate. Undergraduate interns have the time to spare for that 80-hour learning curve; that only takes the first two weeks of a summer internship. And there's no reason that the best of them shouldn't have better general research skills than a mediocre graduate student. And that's what I've found. The average quality of work does depend on the level of the student in the expected way: high school < undergrad < masters < Ph.D.. But the variation within groups is considerably greater than the variation between groups. In fact, the best member of my research group I ever had, the one who did the most sophisticated work, was a high school student! That's my two cents, anyway. :) --Scott Calvin Sarah Lawrence College
In short, the referee's argument is of course strong one, but a good planning of undergraduate research can help make use of undergrads. Since these are EXAFS papers, you can definitely use them to support your claim that EXAFS research can be done with undergrads. We have several professors at YU who publish their research, not EXAFS related, with undergraduates in top journals.
Anatoly
On Sun, 2 Jul 2006, Scott Calvin wrote:
So this makes it perfect for a talented undergraduate. Undergraduate interns have the time to spare for that 80-hour learning curve; that only takes the first two weeks of a summer internship. And there's no reason that the best of them shouldn't have better general research skills than a mediocre graduate student.
And that's what I've found. The average quality of work does depend on the level of the student in the expected way: high school < undergrad < masters < Ph.D.. But the variation within groups is considerably greater than the variation between groups. In fact, the best member of my research group I ever had, the one who did the most sophisticated work, was a high school student!
In my experience with having undergradautes in the lab and at MRCAT over the years, I totally agree with this. They all get something out of the experience and many contribute to the lab or to the beamline by building something. There are a few who go beyond this and make a real scientific contribution. Carlo -- Carlo U. Segre -- Professor of Physics Associate Dean for Special Projects, Graduate College Illinois Institute of Technology Voice: 312.567.3498 Fax: 312.567.3494 Carlo.Segre@iit.edu http://www.iit.edu/~segre
participants (2)
-
Carlo Segre
-
Scott Calvin