While the Soviet is stressing engineering, science, and related technical subjects generally, most of the free-world countries appear rather complacent about the future output in this field. The Times study suggests that in most instances little, if anything, is being done to plan for future needs.

While the Soviet Union is stressing science, mathematics, chemistry, and physics in the secondary school curriculum, the United States is taking an easygoing attitude. Many high schools report that fewer students are taking science courses than ever before.

In the last 4 years the number of college graduates trained for high-school teaching of science has fallen 56 percent. The United States is not training enough high-school teachers of mathematics, science, or physics to meet the needs of an expanding secondary enrollment.

The following table showing the numbers of graduates prepared to teach various subjects illustrates the present situation:

This means, realistically, that the total number of college graduates who are prepared to teach high school science has dropped from 9,096 in 1950, to 3,978 in 1954, or a decrease of 56 percent. Many who might go into teaching have found more profitable jobs in Government or private industry. Within the next 10 years the high school enrollments will increase from the present 7 million to 10 million. The threat to the high school science program-and it is at this level that the future college engineers and scientists receive their initial training is ominous.

SOVIET STRESSES SCIENCE

Science in the Soviet schools is stressed from elementary grade upward. One-third of the 7-year elementary school curriculum consists of arithmetic, algebra, geometry, the natural sciences, physics, and chemistry. Then, in the secondary schools, 40 percent of the curriculum is devoted to science and mathematics (there are no electives). The universities continue this tremendous emphasis on the sciences and technical fields.

This is not done by chance. The Soviet Union has deliberately set out to take the lead in the scientific and engineering fields.

The purpose of higher education is expressed in the Soviet encyclopedia this way: "To prepare highly qualified politically trained engineering personnel with well-rounded education, cultured, whole-heartedly devoted to the motherland and to the course of Lenin-Stalin, capable of completely mastering and using the newest accomplishments of advanced science and technology and of merging scientific theory with the practical work of building a Communist society." Informed educators in this country stress that the Soviet state has set the goal of surpassing the United States in technical and scientific achievements.

Dr. George S. Counts, of Teachers College, Columbia University, who has made an extensive study of the Soviet school and college programs, points out that the Soviet leaders now give a polytechnical emphasis to the school program. The enormous expansion of the institutions of higher education in the Soviet may be regarded as a measure of the energy and resources devoted to the preparation of technical and scientific personnel. The enrollment in these institutions has increased from 176,600 in 1928-29 to 1,562,000 in 1953-54.

From all indications, the entire educational power of the Soviet state is committed to the goal of overtaking and surpassing the United States in the scientific and engineering fields.

APPRENTICESHIPS IN BRITAIN

Great Britain is making widespread use of the apprentice system of training. Many of its engineers and scientists, in fact, most of them, leave secondary school at 15 or 16 and go to work. They complete their education in most cases by attending technical colleges where they study part time until they receive ordinary national certificates. If they continue at these colleges full time or part time taking advanced courses, they can qualify for higher national certificates or diplomas. This, in the view of the education officials, means that they have the equivalent of our science or engineering degrees.

There is a shortage, estimated at from 1,300 to 2,500, of scientists and engineers. The shortage varies in both engineering and science according to the skill of the men, with the highest qualified men in shortest supply. This applies especially to aeronautical engineers and men needed for research and development work.

One of the most serious problems in England, as it is in the United States, is the shortage of qualified science and mathematics teachers in secondary schools. It is feared that a failure in some of these schools to give technical and mathematical courses because teachers are not available means that students whose interest might have been stimulated by the courses are lost by science and engineering.

The Government-appointed Advisory Council on Scientific Policy said in its report this fall that "the continuing decline in the numbers and quality of science teachers, which appears to be equally acute in chemistry, physics, and biology" was a serious problem. It urged that salaries be raised and working conditions be improved for teachers.

ITALY AND GREECE LAG

Dr. Gaetano Martino, now Foreign Minister and formerly Minister of Public Instruction in Italy, said that it was necessary for technical instruction to reach its proper place in the field of education and in the very life of the nation. Dr. Martino declared that it was not enough to create new schools or to expand existing ones; rather, the entire nation must be convinced of their necessity. "Popularizing technical instruction," he stressed, "represents a national problem that may be defined as the problem of modernizing our social life."

Prof. Alexis Pappas, a member of the Greek Production Center and teacher at the Polytechnic of Mechanical Engineering, reports that while the standard of technical training in Greece is high, research and the study of pure science shows a great lag. The Greek scholars urge that more emphasis be placed upon the study of technological and scientific courses.

For some time American as well as free world educators generally have been smug about the type of training that is offered in the Soviet Union. A feeling has been evident that the United States trains its engineers and scientists in so superior a manner that the Russians could never possibly overtake us, regardless of numbers involved.

This attitude can no longer be accepted as valid. Evidence from various sources suggest that the Soviet is now stressing quality as well as quantity. Dr. Nicholas DeWitt, of the Harvard University Russian Research Center, says that the quality of professional engineering training in the Soviet Union is no worse than ours. It is based on a 5,000-hour curriculum, 51⁄2 years of training. It is equivalent to a point between our bachelors' and masters' degree.

There is an enormous shortage of science teachers in this country, Dr. DeWitt says. Thus, the problem of providing a decent foundation for future scientists is complicated. Unless the high schools encourage youngsters to take science

55066-55-No. 2- -5

courses, the colleges will find that the number taking engineering and other technical work will continue to decrease.

RATIO IS REVERSED

According to Dr. John R. Dunning, atomic physicist and dean of the Columbia University School of Engineering, Soviet technical schools seem to be equal in quality to those of this country. Dr. Dunning said that the Soviet Union produced as many Ph. D.'s as the United States last year; however, while United States degrees were 3 to 1 in favor of the humanities, Soviet degrees ran 3 to 1 in favor of science and engineering.

"We have almost lost the battle for scientific manpower," Dr. Dunning warned. "Russia has nearly as many engineers and scientists as we have and is producing them at a much faster rate. All the money we could pour into scientific education would not stop Russia from producing 2 or 3 times as many engineers as we do in the future."

The United States has approximately 500,000 engineers and 200,000 other scientists. Russia has 400,000 engineers and 150,000 scientists. But with the present tremendous rate of training in the technical schools and colleges of the Soviet Union it will be but a matter of several years at most before we are reached, if not outstripped, in the total supply of technically trained personnel.

In engineering, natural and physical sciences, medicine, and agriculture the Soviet Union and this country have the same number of advanced degree holders, about 50,000 each. The number of students entering upon graduate training is higher in the Soviet than in this country.

The Soviet has an additional advantage because of its emphasis upon subprofessional or 2-year institutes. These "technicums" give better training in most instances, educators report, than our technical institutes. The "technicums" supply a large share of supporting personnel in engineering work, while we often wastefully supply trained engineers for these positions.

Moreover, the Soviet Union makes inducements to engineering students. Some of these institutions report up to eight applicants for each vacancy. Thus, the cream-of-the-crop can be selected. Virtually all Soviet engineering schools offer 5-year deferments, and sometimes even exemptions from military service. Scientific and engineering occupations are the highest paid in the Soviet Union, and attract the greatest number of candidates.

In contrast, said Dr. John T. Rettaliata, president of Illinois Institute of Technology, graduate education in the United States is having difficulty in retaining students because of local draft board policies in some parts of the country. He urged that granting selective service deferments be considered on the basis of "enhancing the security of the majority."

Until 2 years ago, it was fashionable to discredit the quality of the Soviet technological effort.

But, said Dr. Thomas H. Chilton, chairman of the engineering manpower commission of the Engineers Joint Council, the performance of Soviet machines of war and Soviet accomplishment of the enormous industrial effort involved in the production of nuclear weapons have effectively dissipated smug self-confidence in continuing technological superiority here.

It must now be recognized, said Dr. Chilton, that the Soviet educational system is directed to technological advance because in the modern world knowledge plus engineering equals power. The Soviet Union is bending every effort to a totalitarian economy and educational system toward this end. He added that in terms of numbers, "our country is not keeping pace with the Soviet Union in the training of engineers, scientists, and other technical men."

SECONDARY SCHOOLS AN ISSUE

Teachers for engineering college staffs are difficult to find. A typical engineering school wanted to add 12 teachers to the staff. With difficulty, the dean finally hired 2 American men and 2 women, and 8 foreign nationals. The salary structure and atmosphere in this school are as favorable as in any school in the country. The college did not object to hiring foreign engineers, but the dean mentioned this incident as indicative of the problems that lie ahead in the expansion of the engineering colleges.

According to Dr. Chilton and other leaders in the field, the problem of greatest concern to the engineering and scientific professions at present is that of the secondary schools. Scientists are worried about the quality and quantity

of mathematical and scientific instruction that the high school students reecive. Under present conditions, instruction must, in many instances, be entrusted to teachers who have had little or no training in mathematics and science.

The loss is obvious. Pupils who are qualified to consider these professions get neither the inspiration nor motivation necessary. Those already interested fail too often to get the basic training prerequisite to successful professional study.

At the same time the emphasis upon science and technology in the Soviet Union and its satellites is growing. The Soviet Government is aware of the vital role that science and technology can play in helping the Soviet Union achieve her objectives, whether political, economic or military.

Dr. M. H. Trytten, director, Office of Scientific Personnel, National Research Council, states that students in the Soviet technical schools and colleges are exempted from military service until graduation. Thereafter they are assigned for a period to specific posts in their specialties.

"Thus," notes Dr. Trytten, "Russia has apparently solved the vexing problem of the role of the technical specialist in a very direct manner. This is in line with its realistic policy of considering scientific and technical personnel as merely another but most important factor in the total national military potential."

Educators are convinced that the United States and the free world generally will have to take stock at once, and map out a constructive program to maintain technological leadership. Dr. James H. Taylor, assistant director for manpower, Office of Defense Mobilization, holds that this country is not training enough highly qualified scientists and engineers to meet the requirements of our national defense and economic growth. He warns that the preservation of our technological leadership cannot be taken for granted. It can be maintained only by well conceived plans and vigorous action.

DEMAND EXCEEDS SUPPLY

The demand for graduate engineers and applied scientists of demonstrated creative and mathematical ability has far exceeded the supply since 1951, informed authorities agree. The United States needs a minimum of 30,000 new graduates a year to meet the engineering demand. We are creating a shortage that will grow greater each year.

The draining off of many engineering, physics, and mathematics teachers to industry by attractive salaries is producing an acute shortage of competent teachers in these fields, reports Dr. W. R. Woolrich, dean of the engineering college at the University of Texas. Dr. Woolrich estimates that there is a shortage of 500 competent engineering teachers at present.

Dean S. C. Hollister of the Cornell University College of Engineering, calls the situation in science, engineering and technology "truly critical." Observing that our national defense rests on technological superiority, Dr. Hollister says that the Soviet Union is turning out more than twice as many engineering graduates as is this country, and with training comparable to our graduate level.

"Many persons fail to realize the impact that science, engineering and technology have had in our national life and world affairs," reports Dr. Hollister. "We can even note a desire that scientific and technological developments be curtailed. This would surely be the road to national suicide. The lack of understanding of the role of science, engineering, and technology in our society is perhaps the gravest element of our present situation."

The conclusion is inescapable that the United States is not educating a sufficient number of scientists, engineers, and technical personnel. The Soviet world is bending all its energies to win the race for technological supremacy. Responsible educators in this country, and in the free nations of the world, recognize the serious problems involved. It is essential, they believe, that the complacency and indifference now found in high quarters be replaced with understanding and action.

The CHAIRMAN. All right; go ahead now.

Mr. HINSHAW. Today each young man, upon reaching age 18, is liable for training and service. Many get it over with by volunteering for induction upon graduating from high school. At best it is not a bright prospect for all able-bodied young men to spend from 2 to 6 years doing something most of them loathe to do. They want, naturally, to get on with other things, but they realize that these are evil times, so they resign themselves.

Some go on to college because there they have a chance to get an education and to become a commissioned officer through the ROTC units if they are physically qualified. Thus they can postpone the fateful day of service for 4 years. By that time they will have qualified for a commission and can take 2 years of active duty, and in the meantime, get married.

Then there is a large group who find themselves physically not qualified for ROTC but physically qualified for induction as enlisted men. That is a group generally having a bad complex-smart enough to take on an education, maybe smarter than the ROTC boys, but they have to serve as enlisted men under the ROTC fellows because perhaps their eyes are not 20-20 and yet their bodies are warm. That group manages to stay in college by deferment for academic reasons. have had experience with that group lately.

I

May I say in passing that the only group that can safely plan a future is the physically disqualified.

So we come down to the future scientist, engineer, and technician-the young man with the extraordinary brain that we need so badly. Where is he in this program? He was doubtless in the top 5 percent of his high-school class scholastically, and even may have been valedictorian of his class. We will never know exactly, but I think it is safe to assume that about one-half of the young men like him either enlist for 4 to 6 years or volunteer for induction to get it over with. What does he do afterward? He normally wants to get married, so the quicker the better, and he may take up to 4 years of college if his family can afford it, and then go to work. Very few of this group ever go into science, because they are already at least 24 years old when they graduate.

What about the other half of the brains, the weirds, the book worms, as they used to be called? Some go into ROTC, those that can, and the rest hope to be deferred while they acquire learning and degrees. That is the group my bill, H. R. 2847, is designed to retrieve.