APPENDIX ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD STATEMENT BY DR. GEORGE A. KEYWORTH, II COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES October 7, 1981 Chairman Fuqua, Members of the Committee, I am pleased to submit this statement on an issue that all agree is an important one - engineering manpower. Few would argue with the premise that our National technological capabilities have provided the basis for an impressive standard of living and a competitive position in the world from both commercial and national security perspectives. Research and Engineering, and their respective disciplines, form the foundation of that accomplishment. With a growing understanding over the last decade of the implications of this very simple premise have come a number of legitimate concerns about the building blocks of that foundation. The subject of today's hearing engineering manpower is one of those building blocks. The engineering community plays a vital role in technology development through conversion of scientific discoveries into commercial products. A healthy engineering community is essential to the long-term resolution of many of our economic problems. Although there is no simple solution to these problems, it is clear that increased productivity is an important part of the solution. The current consensus, however, tells us that the field of engineering may soon become part of our economic problem - rather than part of the solution unless issues within the profession are resolved. A variety of statistics have been cited in documentation of the problem. While they may differ slightly, they all lead in the same direction. The key aspects of the problem include shortages of engineers in several disciplines, shortages of graduate students in engineering and difficulty in retaining and recruiting engineering faculty. The existing shortage of Ph.D's available for employment in government and industry, as well as in universities and colleges, results mainly from the availability of jobs with industry, where starting salaries for bachelor-level graduates are more attractive and equipment better. The lure of higher salaries and the decreasing quality of life in academia is also causing a migration of university faculty to industry. The implications of these trends are disturbing. With fewer and fewer faculty and engineering students seeking advanced degrees, the supply of Ph.D's is dwindling at the same time that industry's need for doctoral training and engineering enrollment at the undergraduate level is increasing. This situation raises fundamental questions about the capability of the engineering education system to turn out qualified engineers at either the graduate or undergraduate level. The difficulty in solving the faculty shortage problem also is indicative of the long-lead time required by academic institutions to meet new demands, a lead-time which often means that by the time a perceived need is met, the demand has changed. The engineering manpower problem is not limited to the university community, however; it extends throughout our educational system and encompasses a wide variety of factors related to demographics and our approach to education as a whole. Not only is there a decreasing pool of high school students from which tomorrow's scientists and engineers will come, but those smaller numbers of students are not receiving broad exposure to science and math in the earliest grades, an exposure necessary to instill interest in pursuing an engineering career. Thus education presents a complicated problem with both short- and long-term implications. Stated in its simplest form, more graduate students and more faculty members in engineering are needed. The simple words, however, do not reflect adequately the extent to which failures in engineering education will affect the Nation's future technological growth. Nor do they capture the symbiosis between industry, academia and the engineering profession that will be required to solve the problem. It is in this cooperation of the affected communities that the solution must lie. Whenever a serious problem with national implications arises there is a temptation to turn to the Federal government for a solution. In the case of engineering manpower the Federal government does have a role. But that role does not call for direct intervention in what, fundamentally, is a marketplace problem. The problem must and can be worked out by those who supply engineering manpower and those who use it. If there are questions of the quality and future availability of engineering manpower, and certainly there are, it clearly is in the best interests of the industrial "consumer" to take the necessary actions to ensure that his needs are met. The needs of industry for top quality engineers, the requirements of the academic community to meet those needs in a way that promotes continued academic excellence, and the needs of the Nation for technological growth are generally congruent. There may well be perturbations in the involved sectors before a balanced solution is reached. There may even be fundamental changes. As science and technology have produced rapid changes in our lives over the last decades, the academic and industrial communities must continue to adapt and restructure to meet changing circumstances. These fundamental facts of the marketplace clearly are being recognized by industry. As stated by Dr. Lewis Branscomb in his testimony before this Committee, IBM has awarded 278 graduate and predoctoral fellowships in mathematics, science and engineering over the last three years. He also stated that IBM plans to make 180 grants to universities between 1980 and 1984 to support new science and engineering initiatives chosen by the universities. In a similar vein, Exxon Education Foundation has announced a $15 million engineering education program which will provide support for engineering doctoral candidates at 66 colleges and universities. The program also will provide funds to 100 university departments of engineering for salaries for professors who might otherwise seek higher paying jobs in industry. These types of actions alone will not solve the problem but they are a step in the right direction. The many discussions and symposia on the engineering manpower issue have produced a variety of suggestions for additional activities aimed at the many complexities of the problem. A key factor among those suggestions is increased interaction among the academic and industrial sectors and professional engineering societies. We support the thrust of these suggestions that recognize the appropriate responsibilities of the involved sectors. At the same time, we believe that the Federal government, too, has an appropriate role. We must continue to reaffirm the importance of science and technology to the Nation's economic future and national security. Federal budget reductions in science and technology R&D speak not to the value of those fields, but to current economic conditions and the appropriate role of the Federal government. We must encourage our younger generation to seek out the challenges offered by science and mathematics and encourage them to enter rewarding careers in the engineering field. At the same time, we must encourage curricula which properly prepare them to do so. Finally, we will continue to encourage all of the sectors involved in the engineering problem to work together to seek innovative solutions. |