Page images

funds, the skyrocketing costs of maintaining this equipment, has already

placed an added burden on tuition dollars.)

Yet the value of an engi

neering education and, hence, the long-range future of U. S. innovation

and technology, depend critically on a solid foundation in laboratory


"We, therefore, propose that the National Science Foundation should

institute and seek funds for a special program for the replacement of

equipment/instrumentation for undergraduate teaching Laboratories in

engineering and the physical sciences.

The funds would be distributed

as a dollar grant per graduating senior in engineering and physical

sciences on the basis of annual institutional proposals.

In order to

assure that only essential equipment is purchased, institutions would be

required to match all grants on the basis of l institutional dollar for

every 2 fed-eral dollars.

(This would still place a tremendous burden

on the insti-tutions, but the total problem would nevertheless begin to

be alleviated.)"

His survey confirms the serious need to remedy the lack of modern

sophisticated laboratory instrumentation without which the up-to-date

training of students is not possible.


The undergraduate laboratories of science and engineering can no

longer be neglected. The large number of students who make up the bulk

of annual technological entries into the nation's work force must have

access to the sophisticated equipment now available if they are to be

the productive persons we seek.

If the Committee seeks direction for the most critical equipment

need--equipment which might be useful to all science and engineering

students rather than to one discipline--then I would recommend increased

support for computers.

Industry is moving rapidly to incorporate computer graphics into

manufacturing and development.

The drafting board is joining the abacus,

the slide rule, and the buggy whip on a dusty shelf.

Computer graphics

holds the promise of substantial productivity increases in education as

they have begun to do in the aircraft, chemical, automotive and construc

tion industries.

The techniques now in place in innovative industries (and in a very

few universities) can be applied as part of instruction to scientific

analysis, to design, to problem-solving, and to the understanding of

concepts--but only if the tools are available.

The Subcommittee has

already heard, according to a November 1979 article in CAUSE/EFFECT, a

presentation from R. G. Gillespie supporting a national commission to

study information technology in education.

I don't believe we can or

should wait.

The need is too urgent and during the delay generations of

[blocks in formation]

This specific recommendation, however, is not intended to deflect

attention or under emphasize the needs of all instructional scientific


The need is pervasive in all disciplines and well-educated

scientists and engineers cannot be produced without strong departments

of mathematical, physical, and biological sciences.

I urge the Committee to seek new dollars for NSF for scientific


Is is time for the nation to recognize an urgent need.



"Sources of Productivity Growth and of the Recent Slowdown"

J. W. Kendrick, George Washington University.


"Science Education for the Eighties" Advisory Committee
for Science Education January 17, 1980.


"Employment Opportunities for the New Engineers," P. J. Sheridan, Eng Ed 70, 84, January 1980, p. 326.


The Association of Independent Engineering Colleges includes:

California Institute of Technology
Carnegie-Mellon University
Case Western Reserve University
Clarkson College of Technology
Cooper Union
Drexel University
Harvey Mudd College
Illinois Institute of Technology
Lehigh University
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Polytechnic Institute of New York
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Rice University
Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
Stevens Institute of Technology
Worcester Polytechnic Institute


We have conducted a survey among 14 of our member · institutions. Caltech and MIT's heavy research base makes them atypical and they were excluded from the survey.

Mr. Brown. Thank you very much, Dr. Baker. The question that would arise in an effort to increase the science education funding, which the committee would be very sympathetic with, I am sure you are aware, is what would be the highest priority in trying to do that? Can I assume from your presentation with regard to the importance of upgrading of equipment that you would place a very high priority on the program aimed at accelerating the replacement of all of your specified category of those computers? Would that be an item you would feel would do the most good for science education?

Dr. BAKER. I think it would do the most good not only for science education but for industry as a whole.

Mr. Brown. For industry as well?

Dr. BAKER. For industry as well. We see marked increases in productivity both in our teaching and in our industries.

Mr. Pease, do you have some questions?

Mr. PEASE. Mr. Chairman, I do, but we are going to try to have the other witnesses today.

Mr. BROWN. Yes.
Mr. PEASE. I think I had better restrain myself. Thank you.

Mr. Brown. Dr. Baker, we may want to address some further questions to you, and in view of the time constraints I wonder if you could give us written answers to any questions we have.

Dr. BAKER. Yes; I will be glad to.

Mr. Brown. We now have a distinguished panel of three members representing the public interest in science education: Dr. Allen Hammond, who is the editor and publisher of Science '80 magazine; Mr. Mick Rhodes, of station WGBH, Boston, Mass.; and Joel Bloom, from the Association of Science and Technology Centers, here in Washington.

May we have you gentlemen present your statements at this time, starting with you, Dr. Hammond. I think you may legitimately claim that the publication, Science '80, is making a very substantial contribution to science education in this country, and we hope that you will make an even larger one in the future.

[The biographical sketch of Dr. Hammond follows:]


Dr. Hammond is originally from Los Alamos, New Mexico. He attended Stanford University, where he majored in chemical engineering and completed the interdisciplinary honors program in social sciences; he was elected to Phi Beta Kappa and Tau Beta Pi and received his B.S. degree in 1966. He did graduate work at Harvard in applied mathematics and geophysics, and completed his Ph.D. in 1970.

Dr. Hammond has been a consultant to the Rand Corporation on mathematical models of educational systems, an instructor at Harvard, and, since 1970, a writer and editor for Science, where he originated and directed the Research News section of the magazine. He has helped to develop and edit a series of special issues of Science devoted to major national problems such as energy, food and materials. Most recently, he founded and edits a new national magazine of science, Science 80, for the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Dr. Hammond has authored or contributed to 7 books, including Energy and the Future, which has since been translated into four foreign languages, and he has also published more than 150 articles, essays, editorials, and reviews in science and other publications. His professional interests include earth and planetary sciences, energy technologies and energy policy. and the role of the scientist and engineer in our society. He is also a life-long skier and mountain climber. He and his wife, Alice, comprise a two-career family (she is a clinical psychologist) and live in the Washington, D.C. area.

Personal Data.-Born 6 Sept., 1943, Chicago, Illinois. U.S. Cit izen. Married, 1 child. Home Address : 8305 Salem Way, Bethesda, MD 20014 phone 301-654–7232. Business Address : 1515 Mass. Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20005 phone 202-4675200.

Education.-B.S. Standford University, 1966. Chemical Engineering, Social Science Honors Program ; Phi Beta Kappa, Tau Beta Pi. A.M. Harvard University, 1967. Ph.D. Harvard University, 1970. Applied Mathematics and Geophysics.

Positions.—Editor, Science 80 (published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science), 1979 to present. Research News Editor, Science, (published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science), 1970–1979. Associate Editor, Energy, (published by Pergamon Press), 1976–1979. Earlier part-time employment includes an instructorship at Harvard University and consultant positions at the Rand Corporation and the Smithsonian Institution's Office of Ecology.

Professional Affiliations.-American Meteorological Society ; Mathematical Association of America ; American Association for the Advancement of Science; National Association of Science Writers; International Solar Energy Society.



Dr. HAMMOND. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I hope that it will, although it is still at a very early stage. But I think the fact that a major scientific organization such as the American Association for the Advancement of Science felt the need for additional information about science was so great that it has become associated with the launching of a new magazine is a fact worthy of this committee's consideration.

Let me just summarize my remarks very briefly, in view of the hour. I think that it is very clear that there is a strong, and if you like, growing public concern about the science and technology in medicine, and that can be translated in a way into a need for more information, whether one is talking about issues that effect us all as concerned citizens or those which affect us individually as consumers trying to cope with a complicated society.

Beyond that basic need for information, there also continues unabated a fascination with science as really the last frontier, with the exploration of new worlds and new domains within our own world.

I think that people in our society need some understanding of the process of science. They need some sense, some perspective on science as a part of our culture in order to be an intelligent consumer of science and in order to be an intelligent citizen in this kind of complicated society. The phrase that Dr. Rutherford used early this morning, scientific illiteracy, resonates with many of my concerns.

The example that is perhaps oversimplified, but which I find compelling, is to note that we all appreciate music and we know a little bit about it, instruments, its history, the great figures of the past and some of the active people at the present. And yet hy and large people know far less about science as part of our culture, and it is certainly true that science, technology, and medicine affects all of us and is changing our world far more dramatically than music.

Parallel to this need for greater public understanding of science, I think one can demonstrate demand on the part of the public for more information. Certainly the audience for science on television, science

« PreviousContinue »