EDITORIAL
The Hard Task of Upholding Standards In the U.S. scientific manpower effort the optimum push may not be the same as the maximum
r. Wallace R. Brode lias made a detailed study of problems in the supply of scientific manpower, and in the leading article of Science, Jan. 24, 1964, has presented some important conclusions. Dr. Brode says that we should not be worried about leveling off in number or proportion of graduates in science and engineering as long as proper standards of quality are maintained. He feels that the worry should be about any movement to increase the number of graduates by lowering standards of accomplishment, about programs of utilization requiring more personnel than can be produced without lowering standards, and about failure to provide personnel for essential areas such as teaching. Dr. Brode concludes that the schools which produce the major supply of our Ph.D. candidates are handicapped by a lack of competent younger instructors, and says that such instructors have been enticed away to subsidized work programs that tend to overtax our supply. He says that the "bottleneck"—if there is one—in the production of Ph.D.'s in chemistry is not a matter of facilities or instruments of support such as fellowships, but is a shortage in the number of qualified graduate students with ability and desire to work toward advanced degrees. From his studies he concludes that we are approaching a ceiling of maximum utilization. He feels that we need to find ways to make important but neglected areas more attractive so as to effect a better distribution of the limited supply of scientists. Whether the real driving force is competition among nations for scientific standing or the more laudable goal of increasing the value of
D
science and technology to society, we should not allow haste and the short-term goal to mislead us. There are dangers that under pressure to use fellowship funds, and in the face of the shortage of adequately qualified candidates for graduate schools, standards might be lowered. If the trend toward higher status for research and lower status for teaching continues, it is likely that for all except the dedicated teacher the attraction will be away from teaching. The result will be poorly qualified students. But there is also likely to be less of the stimulation and attraction to scientific work so often evinced by outstanding teachers. Competition between research and teaching may hamper the future more through poor training than it will aid it through increased research findings. If heavy pressure to produce more scientists and engineers should cause some lowering of standards, the greatest harm might come in the area of teaching, where the significance for the future is most serious. To proceed most effectively, control and restraint are required. This is perhaps the most difficult part of the task when greater than optimum financial resources are available. If we are to proceed under forced draft in the development of scientists and technologists, let us keep in mind that the goal is not simply more scientific work, but more work meeting high standards.
FEB.
3, 1964
C&EN
7
