Journal of Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry

, Volume 106, Issue 1, pp 33–38 | Cite as

Career development and project planning for emerging thermal analysis scientists

  • M. Ellen Matthews
  • Alan T. Riga


Advances in science and technology are now at the heart of the global economy, but the number of students earning degrees in the sciences, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields has stalled. According to the National Association for Colleges and Employers (NACE), programs have been initiated nationwide to nurture interest in the sciences, including research competitions, co-ops and internships, and K-12 STEM education. Senior thermal analysis scientists are not only researchers, they are role models, mentors and teachers intimately involved in the recruitment and training of young scientists. The authors present guidelines for thermal analysis research project planning for high school students, undergraduate students and master’s and doctoral candidates. Project planning includes developmentally appropriate techniques, methods, instruments, scope and significance. Case studies illustrate examples of short-term, concrete materials analysis projects tailored to younger student researchers, as well as master’s level projects making significant contributions to the state of the science and innovative doctoral research. In addition to designing projects for students at all levels, senior thermal analysis scientists can use specific teaching and training techniques to help young scientists develop their abilities in the lab and at the podium.


TA education Undergraduate research Career development 


  1. 1.
    Terrell N. Science technology engineering mathematics occupations. Occup Outlook Q. 2007;51(1):26–33.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tanaka H, Koga N. Thermal analysis and kinetics of solid-state reactions: its application to education in chemistry. J Therm Anal Calorim. 1999;56:855–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hakvoort G, Hakvoort TE. A practical thermal analysis course. J Therm Anal Calorim. 1997;49:1715–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Riga A, Bracone N, O’Connor A, Somrack A, Oberoi L, Alexander K. Thermal analysis in university research and undergraduate teaching labs. In: Proceedings of 32nd NATAS conference; 2004. p. 104.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wunderlich B. Teaching thermal analysis of polymeric materials. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2000;59:7–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sørensen OT. A new dimension in thermal analysis: virtual class-room teaching over the Internet. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2005;80:793–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University. Reinventing undergraduate education: a blueprint for America’s research universities. Stony Brook: State University of New York at Stony Brook for the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching; 1998.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Suga H. Prospects of materials science: from crystalline to amorphous solids. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2000;60:957–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Short N, Riga AT, Dutra de Souza KC, Alexander KS. Thermal and analytical characterization of a polymorphic drug: nifedipine. In: Proceedings of 33rd NATAS conference; 2005. disk paper.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zaboura D, Riga AT, Short N, Dutra de Souza KC, Alexander KS. Thermal and analytical characterization of a polymorphic drug: tolbutamide. In: Proceedings of 33rd NATAS conference; 2005. disk paper.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Najjar O, Matthews ME, Presswala L, Atkinson I, Gerhardstein N, Moran J, Wei R, Riga AT. Essential physical-chemical properties of d and l amino acids by thermal and analytical methods. Podium Presentation, American Chemical Society Meeting-in-Miniature, Notre Dame College, South Euclid, Ohio; 2007.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Maheswaram MPK, Riga A, Alexander K. (2009). An innovative dielectric method determined the crystalline and amorphous content in pharmaceuticals. Poster, College of Science Research Day 2009, Cleveland State University, Cleveland, Ohio.
  13. 13.
    Seymour E, Hunter A-B, Laursen SL, DeAntoni T. Establishing the benefits of research experiences for undergraduates in the sciences: first findings from a three-year study. Sci Educ. 2004;88(4):493–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Adhikari N, Nolan D. “But what good came of it at last?”: how to assess the value of undergraduate research. Not AMS. 2002;49(10):1252–7.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Barlow A, Villarejo M. Making a difference for minorities: evaluation of an education enrichment program. J Res Sci Teach. 2004;41(9):861–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gordon EW, Bridglall BL. Creating excellence and increasing ethnic minority leadership in science, engineering, mathematics and technology: a study of the Meyerhoff Scholars Program at the University of Maryland-Baltimore County; 2004. Retrieved April 15, 2010 from
  17. 17.
    Hathaway R, Nagda B, Gregerman S. The relationship of undergraduate research participation to graduate and professional educational pursuit: an empirical study. J Coll Stud Dev. 2002;43(5):614–31.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hunter AB, Laursen SA, Seymour E. Becoming a scientist: the role of undergraduate research in students’ cognitive, personal and professional development. Sci Educ. 2006;91:36–74.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kremer JF, Bringle RG. The effects of intensive research experience on the careers of talented undergraduates. J Res Dev Educ. 1990;24(1):1–5.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lopatto D. Undergraduate research experiences support science career decisions and active learning. CBE Life Sci Educ. 2007;6(4):297–305.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Russell SH, Hancock MP, McCullogh J. The pipeline: benefits of undergraduate research experiences. Science. 2007;316:548–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wenderholm E. Challenges and the elements of success in undergraduate research. SIGSCE Bull. 2004;36(4):73–5.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bauer KW, Bennett JS. Alumni perceptions used to assess undergraduate research experience. J Higher Educ. 2003;74(2):210–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lopatto D. The essential features of undergraduate research. CUR Q. 2003;23:139–42.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lopatto D. Survey of Undergraduate Research Experiences (SURE): first findings. Cell Biol Educ. 2004;3:270–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mabrouk P, Peters K. Student perspectives on undergraduate research experiences in chemistry and biology. CUR Q. 2000;21:25–33.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mervis J. Student research: what is it good for? Science. 2001;293:1614–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nagda BA, Gregerman SR, Jonides J, von Hippel W, Lerner JS. Undergraduate student-faculty research partnerships affect student retention. Rev High Educ. 1998;22(1):55–72.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pearson M, Brew A. Research training and supervision development. Stud High Educ. 2002;27:135–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Russell SH. Evaluation of NSF support for undergraduate research opportunities: 2003 NSF program participant survey (Draft Final Report to the NSF). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. 2005. Retrieved April 15, 2010 from http://www.sri/com/policy/csted/reports/.
  31. 31.
    Summers MF, Hrabowski FA. Preparing minority scientists and engineers. Science. 2006;311:1870–1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Tang BL, Gan YH. Preparing the senior or graduating student for graduate research. Biochem Mol Biol Educ. 2005;33:277–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tomovic MM. Undergraduate research—prerequisite for successful lifelong learning. ASEE Conf Proc. 1994;1:1469–70.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ward C, Bennett J, Bauer K. Content analysis of undergraduate research student evaluations. 2002. Retrieved April 15, 2010 from
  35. 35.
    Zydney A, Bennett JS, Shahid A, Bauer K. Impact of undergraduate research experience in engineering. J Eng Educ. 2002;19(2):151–7.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Zydney A, Bennett JS, Shahid A, Bauer K. Faculty perspectives regarding the undergraduate research experience in science and engineering. J Eng Educ. 2002;19(3):291–7.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Buckeye PharmaceuticalsBeachwoodUSA
  2. 2.Department of ChemistryCollege of Science and Health Professions, Cleveland State UniversityClevelandUSA

Personalised recommendations