Kathryn, why did you choose chemistry and why City College?

I have a Bachelor's degree in History and Philosophy of Science from the University of Chicago. I liked science but did not know what to major in. At that time of history, during the Vietnam War, student demonstrations, and women's "liberation," I had no real goals for what I wanted in life. So I opted for a major where I could take lots of different science, and was happy just to finish with a degree. I did not take Organic Chemistry at the U of C because it was the hardest undergraduate course given there, and they even recommended the Chem. majors take it someplace else! When I graduated, I decided I wanted to become a veterinarian. But it was more difficult get into Vet school than Medical school. So while trying to get into Vet school, I finally took Organic Chemistry at night at City College, and loved it. I also found out that it was much better to have an experiment go wrong than to make a mistake on a living animal, so I decided to go for my Ph.D. in Chemistry.

What was your experience at City College and the quality of education you received?

I actually liked City College better than the U. of Chicago because of the dedication of the CCNY professors to teaching. I still remember much of what CCNY professors said, from stories to basic chemistry. I am a firm believer that most people find a career in the field of their best teachers.

I had the great fortune to work on Surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy in the early years after its discovery. Martin Fleischmann, of cold fusion fame, actually was one of its discoverers, but did not quite realize it, so Van Duyne got most of the credit for it. I think that is a big reason that Fleischmann was so interested in breaking the cold-fusion story early. So it was fun to be involved in the early history of something, and see the history of science unfold. I also had to opportunity to travel to other countries for conferences. I learned that you should try things, and not assume that they won't work. This is because if the calculations had been done before the experiment, SERS would never have been discovered. I had two mentors for that work, Profs. John Lombardi and Ron Birke. So I learned spectroscopy and electrochemistry, and a lot from both of them.

What is rewarding about chemistry?

Being in-between fields made it difficult for me to find a permanent job. I wanted to be a professor and do basic research, but women (still) do not get much chance at those jobs. I worked at the National Bureau of Standards, IBM Research in San Jose (and the Stanford Synchrotron), the Naval Research Lab, Johnson Wax, and now National Starch and Chemical Co. The most fun I have had was working on self-assembling monolayer films, doing synthesis, spectroscopy and electrochemistry.

Are you satisfied with your present job?

Now I work on problem solving for our products, competitive analysis, patent support, and develop tests for use at our plants. I typically solve several problems a week, which is what I like most about science.

The most surprising and disappointing thing about science is that it is often more important to be politic than be a good scientist, and there is a lot of prejudice against women. The other surprising thing is that there is really quite a lot that you can do with a science degree, and that you can change the direction of your career even after many years.

Is it worth all this effort?

I make a very good living, and have time for other interests. I don't make millions, and I have had some bad days at work, but on the whole, I feel very lucky to have such a good life and career.