[thiazole]

Not my opinion, but I'm debating a guy who is making that very claim for chemists.  He says that in the US, colleges are among the worst for chemists.  When I showed him international school rankings, he said rankings are for chums and added that a PhD doesn't really increase one's education level.  They just measure one's ability to brown nose professors.  You can read his full rant here: http://seekingalpha.com/user/491006/comment/1594539

Since he doesn't believe me (even though I'm someone who has interviewed hundreds of applicants at a biotech company), perhaps more chemists can comment on his two major premises:
1.  American colleges are among the worst in the world and chemists from American colleges can't compete with chemists who graduate/ get post graduate degrees from international schools.
2.  Anything above a BS degree is for title only.  A PhD chemists knows approximately the same chemistry as a BS chemist.

[Borek]

2.  Anything above a BS degree is for title only.  A PhD chemists knows approximately the same chemistry as a BS chemist.

Depends on the chemist

PhDs know much more, especially in their area of specialization. Usually someone with PhD in organic chemistry doesn't know more about quantum chemistry than s/he knew after BS, but their knowledge about organic synthesis and spectroscopic methods is completely different.

[408]

1.  American colleges are among the worst in the world and chemists from American colleges can't compete with chemists who graduate/ get post graduate degrees from international schools.
2.  Anything above a BS degree is for title only.  A PhD chemists knows approximately the same chemistry as a BS chemist.

1.   I have studied abroad, and am actually doing my phd abroad.  I would say the north american education system (I am lumping in canada too, it is about the same) in general is poorer than somewhere like say, Germany.  I personally blame this on the dumbing down of education in english speaking countries, where self-esteem comes before performance, no child left behind act, etc.

2.  Depends.  I am half done my phd and can honestly say I am not learning all that much, but that also went for by undergrad too.  I was always self educated, so during my undergrad I learned things which were far more useful during my phd than undergrad, but this came from doing chemistry at home.

[DrCMS]

I'll state my bias from the outset I'm a PhD chemist educated in the UK. 

During my degree we had students from a US university who did a year at our university while some of our students did a year in their US university.  People I did my PhD with went on to postdoc in the US.

My conclusions from direct interaction with US chemistry students and the stories I heard from UK chemist who went to the US is that the way the US system works with majors/minors and the flexible way students can choose what courses to do when does lead to a US chemist with a degree has less understanding of chemistry compared to a UK chemist with a degree.  However by the time that US chemist has completed their PhD in the US they are as at least as good if not better than a UK PhD student.    It will however have taken them probably 2 years more to get to that same level.  The UK norm is a 3 year degree and 3 year PhD.

As to what value a chemist PhD has I would say a great deal, unfortunately that does not always equate to a higher career earnings.  PhD chemist should know a lot more chemistry than a degree level chemist.

[azmanam]

As someone who earned a BS in chemistry from a private, liberal arts US school, followed by a Ph.D. in Organic Chemistry from a large public state school in the US, I can absolutely say that a Ph.D. chemist knows SO much more than a BS chemist.  I learned more in my first semester of grad school than I ever did in all 4 years of my undergrad.  After my first semester of grad school, I re-read my undergrad senior thesis (which I thought I did a pretty good job on), and I remember thinking to myself, "who did I think I was!"  I had learned so much more.  I could have written a much, much better thesis one semester after grad school than just 6 months previous.

[enahs]

Making gross generalizations like this just shows ignorance. And basing once experience on anecdotal personal experience is just silly.

First, all B.S. in Chemistry are NOT equal. Of the thousands of schools that offer BS in Chemistry here in the US, only a small fraction of them are ACS certified. And even if you get a BS from a school that can offer an ACS certified BS degree, does not mean you meet the requirements for ACS certification. That is just some small "certification" to show that not all degrees are equal. And no, not all ACS B.S. degrees are equal.

Secondly, the vast majority of Chemistry bachelor degrees in the US are not BS degrees, but BA (bachelors of arts) degrees. They are easier to get, and are for students that want to go to pharmacy, nursing or med school, or some other similar trade school. What ends up happening though, is that a VERY large portion of those students do not get into a medical program and say "ohh, I have a bachelors in Chemistry, I can be a Chemist". So, they have a substantial education deficit compared to a B.S. Chemist degree, but are treated the same by the rest of the world. They are both treated as bachelors degrees in Chemistry. I personally think B.A. in Chemistry should be abolished for this reason and others.


Third, and most importantly, it does not matter if you go to the "Best" school in the world in the "Best" country (all in your own personal opinions); if you do not try and want to learn the material, your education is going to be poor.


Now, my B.S. degree was from an ACS certified, small, not well known school. The University of Arkansas at Little Rock. My professors were all old, hard, and required their students who were getting B.S. with ACS certification to really work hard and really learn the material. I also did undergraduate research (outside of my institution) after my first year.  I am not trying to make my self sound all impressive and bad ass, nor am I exaggerating when I say, after my B.S. degree and then going on to do collaborating/working with PhD chemist and physicists from the best institutions all over the world (including a Nobel prize winner), as well as looking into the job market (again, stressing, not just the US).  All of these people, from all over the world from the "best" places in the world were always shocked at how much I knew, and how much experience I had. I had dozens upon dozens of world class researchers tell me I had so much more experience and knowledge then 99% of people with PhDs had. I was getting job offers that they were paying me with a BS more then they were offering fresh PhD graduates from the top schools.

Conversely, I know some people from my school, with BS degrees in Chemistry that are some of the stupidest people in the world.


It does not matter what country or school your get your degree from; if you do not want to learn the material you will not. And it is totally easy to get PhDs from places like Oxford and Yale and still be completely stupid. Degrees all over the world now, are given to people for hard work; because there is now this sentiment about entitlement towards school.


I mean, seriously, the educational requirement (classroom, tests, etc) at places like Oxford, Berkley, and Yale for a PhD in Chemistry are honestly a joke compared to the University of Arkansas at Little Rock. I am serious. But, you are going to have a lot more research experience and other advantages at those schools compared to UALR. I know some people with PhD degrees from UALR that are so damn much smarter then the average PhD graduate from these other top schools. And I have also met PhD graduates from these other top schools that could not begin to pass the candidacy exams at UALR. Does that make me think that UALR is better? No, not by a long shot. Does that make me think all the PhD graduates from these top schools are actually idiots. No, not by a long shot. Go back and reread by very first two sentences.


Personal rant: I am sorry, but the world is getting overly liberal in the sense that everybody says you have to treat everybody the same. I completely disagree with this. Treating somebody negatively (or positively) because of their religion or skin color is wrong, horrible and disgusting. But EVERYBODY is DIFFERENT, and therefor everybody should not be treated the same! Treating everybody the same is why in my opinion, that on average, as each new generation gets a BS/MS/PhD in (some field) seems to have less and less understanding of their subject material (while there will always being exceptions).