Hi Bill,
I hear ya!
It has been the same for me over the last few years. Years ago, my training used to
incorporate a short competancy exam and I found that it at least got students thinking
and I feel it made them more aware of what NMR spectroscopy was all about. They all
knew how to tune probes, correctly establish the lock signal, and they could recognize
problems with NMR results when they arose. I too had to tone down my training as the
attitude of many of the faculty here is that students are to spend their time at the bench
in the lab and not at the console (such as it is) of an NMR spectrometer.
We now have autotuning probes and a robotic sample changer. I resisted these
purchases to the amusement and disgust of the faculty arguing that no one would learn
anything about NMR anymore. The only thing you need to know to get a spectrum is
what room the spectrometer is in. Many of thecurrent bunch of students have training
on all of the equipment and can still run a spectrum the old fashoned way but I find they
are more and more taking the path of least resistance and using the autosamplers
autoshimming and autotuning probes. I'm sure that the incoming students will only use
the automated systems and will not even know what locking or shimming are, let alone
recognizing problems with their data.
When I make the argument that no one is able to acquire their own NMR data, the
faculty say that in industry they do not have to know, therefore it is not important. We
are a university, I tell them. This is the ONLY chance the students have to LEARN
NMR. High throughput and efficiency should NOT be a priority, EDUCATION should.
I feel that students are being short changed. God help us when the automated sytems
are in need of repair !
There is a place for automation, however I feel that a university is not that place. The
instrument companies have done a fantastic job at manufacturing very efficient
productive systems. I am truly impressed by the efficiency! If I was a facility manager
in industry where the dollar (rather than education) is the bottom line I would certainly
insist on such systems.
With total automation being more and more common, I'm sure that NMR facility
managers like us are a dying breed. Where will they learn NMR? The NMR manager
of the future will be a product of the market demand of the instrument companies.
Glenn
Date sent: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 19:25:44 -0500
To: ammrl_at_ammrl.org
From: "William C. Stevens" <wstevens_at_siu.edu>
Subject: user competency problems
> Dear Colleagues:
>
> I have created problems for myself with regard to the competency
> level of my user base and I would like your reflections and suggestions.
>
> One mistake I made was backing off on what I required my users to
> endure in terms of training from me. I used to insist that they at
> least understand the arm-waving vector explanation of
> inversion-recovery before they were allowed to practice on the
> instruments and get passwords. Neither the users nor their professors
> appreciated this and I felt like I was expending a lot of effort
> teaching this material and getting no positive reinforcement in
> return, so I relaxed my standards.
>
> Then I got a decent graduate assistant and I turned over to him a lot
> of the training load, and he was even less demanding than me.
> Competency declined further.
>
> Now, I have VNMRJ and PFGs, which allows users with no competency
> whatsoever to obtain decent NMR data. The consequence I find evermore
> vexing is that my users are getting progressively more incompetent,
> not even taking care to use the walkup "no-brainer" interface
> correctly. They cannot be troubled even to make sure the solvent is
> set correctly.
>
> First the faculty encouraged me to be lazy about what I required NMR
> users to know. Then the software encouraged me to be lazy. Now,
> formerly competent users are shifting their brains into neutral upon
> entering the NMR lab and are causing problems that they wouldn't have
> caused if they had been here 15 years ago.
>
> My job is beginning to feel an awful lot like that of the Wal-Mart
> Associate who monitors the automated check-out stations and runs
> frantically to assist every bonehead customer who gets into trouble.
> I think I am working more instead of less and, even worse, I'm
> feeling separated from my previous level of understanding of what the
> software is making the instrument do.
>
> Yesterday, a user needed a 1-D nOe. Instead of poring over the VJ
> manuals to figure it out, I fired up the 6.1C emulation instead and
> got him a result. I'm not saying VJ is bad, but I think I'm seeing
> user-friendly produce user-stupid, and maybe director-stupid as well.
>
> Bill
>
> William C. Stevens, Ph.D. Director
> Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Facility
> Southern Illinois University
> Carbondale, IL 62901
> 618-453-6498 voice / -6408 fax / 521-9892 cell
> http://opie.nmr.siu.edu
>
Glenn A. Facey, Ph.D.
NMR Facility Manager
University of Ottawa
mailto:gafacey_at_science.uottawa.ca
http://www.science.uottawa.ca/nmr
Received on Fri Apr 07 2006 - 10:04:58 MST