I am a little puzzled. I am accustomed to thinking of science as an exalted realm of rationality where there is no constraint based upon irrational factors, where a person succeeds in accordance with his/her merit or contribution. Yet the performance of women and minorities in achieving a Ph. D. is no better than-in fact, it is not as good as the success of women and minorities in politics.

I am a little bit at a loss to understand why this should be the case. Are scientists fallible human beings just like politicians?

Dr. COTA-ROBLES. Scientists are fallible human beings. However, I really think that the problem is as Dr. Zacharias pointed out this afternoon, something that starts very early.

Mr. BROWN. Oddly enough, if I may recall an anecdote, when I was in high school all of the mathematics I learned from elementary algebra to elementary calculus was learned from the same person. I only had one math teacher in high school and it was a woman. I thought only women knew mathematics until I got out of high school. I have heard rumors that there are theories about this mathematical filter that you mentioned for women, that is attributed possibly to genetic causes.

Are you aware of that?

Dr. COTA-ROBLES. Yes. I think there is some belief or maybe even more documentation than that, that women may have some inabilities to deal with problems in three dimensions.

Mr. BROWN. Well, the question, of course, we must address is how do we correct inbalances that we presented. It appears that it will take heroic efforts to make a difference in the system even within a generation. How would you suggest that we begin this heroic effort? Do you think our present level of efforts in this area has proven adequate to meet the magnitude of the problem?

Dr. COTA-ROBLES. No, they really haven't proven to be adequate, but that is because they reflect a low priority on education.

I think that the basic problem is that in the early years we have teachers that have very heavy teaching loads, thus teachers are only able to give a few seconds of personal help to each student. This fact permeates the entire educational establishment.

It appears that it would take a clearer acceptance of our responsibilities to our children to educate them, than we are willing to make. Mr. BROWN. You have mentioned this program in Berkeley.

Have you had any experience with programs at your own institution that would indicate routes to success in this area, anything that has been done that we might use as a model that could be helpful and applied nationally?

Dr. COTA-ROBLES. Well, fortunately, at Santa Cruz we have been able in our biological science faculty to employ a faculty that is about 25 percent minorities out of a department of 25 faculty, thus that we have a group of minority faculty within the establishment, as it is, who are carrying their full load as scientists and as professors and as minorities. This has really helped to draw and encourage minority students to enroll in biological sciences in Santa Cruz.

We will have to try to continue to identify and educate more minority scientists who can take faculty positions in math, physics, and chemistry departments, however at present there just aren't very many minority scientists in these academic disciplines.

Mr. BROWN. Is it just luck you were able to get this high proportion in biology? Do you have some sort of affirmative action?

Dr. COTA-ROBLES. We have an affirmative action program to which the campus is committed, in addition it was at a particular time in the early 1970's when faculty appointments were still easily available. At present new faculty resources are not available on a permanent basis to academic institutions. They will be available once again in 10 or 15 years.

Mr. BROWN. Well, can you give us any clues as to strategies that might be successful in reversing this situation?

Does it require that there be a dedicated individual in a key position to really put some effort into an affirmative action program or are we facing a situation that is unsolvable due to the lack of an adequate number of individuals receiving the Ph. D. degrees today?

Dr. COTA-ROBLES. I think that certain individuals can really make a big difference.

In particular the leadership that Ciriaco Gonzales has given the NIH biomedical sciences program, has been very effective. That program has 75 productive foci throughout the country working to increase the number of minorities who are going into science.

If we could develop a parallel program for women to further develop their mathematical strengths.

I think that is true that human commitment is important. This is why I listed the individuals at the beginning of my talk because I felt that each one of these people here has done something special and done it very well.

Mr. BROWN. As you know, Dr. Cota-Robles, the campus at Riverside has recently acquired a new chancellor who is Hispanic.

I am wondering if this and this is a first for the university system-provides an opportunity by establishing a role model to encourage minorities, particularly Hispanics, who aspire to higher academic ranks, that we could use. I am presuming efforts are being made to do that, to begin to redress this problem.

Dr. COTA-ROBLES. I am absolutely convinced that that type of role model is a very helpful one and useful one and particularly since Chancellor Rivera is a published poet, whose poetry can be appreciated throughout the country. I think that that also makes a major difference. Rivera has the credentials that permit him to move into the academic center, into the other areas of academe because he has earned his spurs in his own discipline.

Mr. BROWN. I just wonder how he happened to earn his spurs in Texas instead of California?

I have no further questions.

Mr. PEASE. Thank you, Mr. Brown.

We have one further question from our staff member, Mr. Scoville. Mr. SCOVILLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Doctor, I just would like to address sort of a general attitude that I sometimes encounter in talking to scientists about programs like the minority research center. It sort of follows up on your statement at the very end of your remarks:

I do not mean to imply that the programs I support to improve the development of our women and minorities in science are so-called "social welfare" programs or "make work" programs. I state most clearly that it is to the benefit of science as a whole to develop all of our human reservoirs of scientific talents be these talents in majority males, minorities or women.

The thing that occurs to me is that the Science Foundation makes a great point in its testimony of continually wanting to support only the best or highest quality science. They are generally to be commended for this, the record is excellent.

This rationale, however, is often used to oppose special targeted programs such as the minority centers or other programs for women in science.

On the other hand, unless you assume that scientific talent is somehow genetically distributed differently among ethnic groups or by sex, the pool of research proposals is less than the whole potential pool that might be available, if the figures that you gave us today are indicative. Thus, in a sense NSF is currently supporting less than the best of all possible scientists who might apply if cultural and economic factors did not limit women and minorities in science.

Therefore, if NSF truly supports the highest quality science over the long run, shouldn't NSF substantially or even massively increase its support for women and minorities in science? Would you agree with this assessment and if so, what would you propose to do?

Dr. COTA-ROBLES. The one thing, and I did put it in my written testimony and I didn't comment on here, is that I really feel that the model of the resource center is a very helpful and useful one, and I support the increase in the number of development of resource centers. I realize that they have to be planned very effectively, but the integrated program put forth by the resource center, where we deal with precollege or prehigh school students all the way to faculty research in amorphous solids, that really strikes me as the perfect type of model that can be used, and so I encourage NSF to do this, to try to move further into that.

Mr. SCOVILLE. I am less interested in the particular mechanisms, which no doubt have to be explored to be perfected.

What I really wanted to do is get the attitude which says to support the best or highest quality of science you simply support the pool of best scientists at this particular moment, as opposed to over the longer run.

Mr. PEASE. Dr. Cota-Robles, we thank you very much for your testimony.

I would like to thank all of our witnesses today, even though most of them have left.

I think it has been an excellent day of hearings.

And finally, I would just like to acknowledge the patience of Dr. Rutherford for sticking with us all day long.

The hearing is concluded.

[Whereupon at 5 p.m., the subcommittee was recessed.]