Skip to content

Nanomaterials Research at a Primarily Undergraduate Institution: Transforming Nanorods, Undergraduate Research Communities, and Infrastructure

Summary

This ACS Nanosci. Au perspective addresses a practical problem: many primarily undergraduate institutions (PUIs) lack the instrument density and graduate labor of R1 departments, yet they train a disproportionate share of future STEM Ph.D. students. The Plass group at Franklin & Marshall College, with Penn State collaborators, describes how nanomaterials research can remain high-impact and inclusive when project design, mentoring structures, and shared infrastructure are chosen deliberately. The narrative centers on postsynthetic transformation (PST) of nanoparticle synthons (notably copper chalcogenides), large peer- and near-peer research communities, a computational “nanobots” program that partners F&M students with the van Duin group at Penn State, and remote transmission electron microscopy access coordinated through Penn State’s Materials Characterization Laboratory.

Methods

As a perspective, the paper does not report a single new synthesis protocol as its core contribution; instead it documents recurring design patterns the authors have used over roughly fifteen years. PST is presented as a modular strategy: students can enter on tractable exchange, doping, or morphology-tuning tasks that compose into publishable arcs because the underlying synthons are reliable. Mentoring is described as intentionally scaffolded, combining internal cohorts at F&M with near-peer graduate support from the Schaak laboratory at Penn State for deeper synthesis and advanced characterization. The nanobots thread adds a computational pathway in collaboration with Penn State (van Duin group) so students can participate in modeling and analysis alongside wet-lab PST projects. Finally, the authors detail remote TEM/STEM workflows—including EDS—that make routine imaging feasible for PUI students who cannot host a full microscopy suite locally.

Findings

The authors argue that low entry barriers need not imply low scientific ceiling: PST on robust Cu₂₋ₓS-family platforms lets novices contribute quickly while senior students pursue more open-ended materials problems. They emphasize inclusive communities—large enough to sustain peer teaching and flexible enough for students with different timelines—as a mechanism to broaden participation and persistence in STEM. Remote microscopy is framed as transformative for throughput and training: students gain repeated hands-on data collection without relocating to a national user facility for every experiment. The nanobots collaboration is presented as a viable model for embedding computational nanoscience in a PUI curriculum when partnered with an R1 group. Together, these elements are offered as transferable design principles, not a one-size-fits-all recipe.

Limitations

A perspective synthesizes experience; it is not a controlled outcome study of interventions. Uptake of remote microscopy and distributed mentoring will depend on institutional agreements, staffing, and student preparation. Computational collaborations likewise require sustained faculty time for onboarding and code literacy.

Relevance to group

Adri C. T. van Duin is a named co-author; the nanobots thread documents structured undergraduate engagement with computational chemistry adjacent to the group’s broader reactive MD and force-field development missions.

Citations and evidence anchors