Global Landscape of Chemical Measurement Science Education

Zoltan Mester, Nrc Canada, Secretary General of IUPAC, Canada (Zoltan.Mester@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca)

There is ample anecdotal evidence for the erosion of analytical chemistry as a scientific discipline. This is both impacting and being impacted by faculty appointments, funding structures, and the perception of the field as merely a service function. Additionally, with the advancement of analytical instrumentation, software—including AI tools—and robotics, there is a mistaken belief in some industry organizations that there is a reduced need for highly trained analytical specialists. Warning signs have emerged that the current university chemistry curriculum often does not address the needs of chemistry graduates and future employers and does not enable analytical practitioners to maximize the value of their work. We will reflect on the interdisciplinary curriculum development efforts, which have been the trend in many universities worldwide. This is a significant economic cost, considering that in many countries, the most used practical skills of chemistry graduates are actually related to chemical analysis. A deep and fundamental understanding of analytical chemistry is required to foster the next generation of analytical scientists who have the insight and capacity to contribute to fundamental new developments in this field, as well as the generation of new disruptive technologies.

Here, I will report on an IUPAC project [1] aimed at documenting the status quo in various regions of the world regarding the health of the discipline, the proportion of professorships, funding, and the quality of analytical chemistry education. It will examine current attempts to address these shortcomings and offer some ways forward. The findings will be published in the form of a white paper to support future curriculum development, funding, and hiring decisions.

 

[1] https://iupac.org/project/2019-039-3-500/