DEPARTMENT OF STATE-CONTRACTUAL FISCAL REPORT SUMMARY, FOR THE PERIOD OCT. 25, 1960, TO SEPT. 30, 1961-Continued The following capital contracts, allowances, and other cost items are in force:'. (a) Design and contract administration: McAuliffe, Young & Associates and I. M. Pei & Associates, joint venture: Design of equipment, site work, and landscaping---- $481, 694. 85 Flambert & Flambert, food service consult- Pietro Belluschi: Consultation and review of (b) Reimbursables: Reimbursable travel and per diem. 32, 000. 00 6, 008. 80 1, 152. 90 4, 000. 00 $526, 099.73 23, 215. 44 (d) Construction contracts: Hawaiian Dredging & Construction: Access roadway---- 315, 008. 98 315, 008. 98 Total_ 998, 177.82 OPINIONS ABOUT THE EAST-WEST CENTER CONSULTATIONS WITH ASIAN AND PACIFIC SCIENTISTS ATTENDING THE 10TH PACIFIC SCIENCE CONGRESS Report by W. Edgar Vinacke, professor of psychology, Project Coordinator for the East-West Center, with the assistance of Gerald Meredith, Kenneth Fujii, Dora Shu-fang Dien. University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii, September 1961 I. INTRODUCTION The following pages set forth the results of consultations with members of the 10th Pacific Science Congress held on the University of Hawaii campus during the last 2 weeks of August 1961. These discussions were held principally with scientists to whom the East-West Center gave grants, but a considerable number of other individuals also, in one way or another, have contributed to our impressions. This project is the first concerted effort made by the Center to establish direct professional contact with academic and research people in the other countries of the Pacific. Heretofore, the pressing demands of policy clarification, selection procedures, publicity, and other essentially administrative problems have had to be given top priority. As a consequence, our consultations have several important implications. In the first place, they provide a large number of rather specific suggestions about the University of Hawaii and the Center. We shall attempt to organize these points below. In the second place, the character and value of personal contacts between our own staff and comparable persons in other countries can be assessed and brought into balance with relationships established at other levels. In the third place, the possible ways in which the East-West Center can operate as a particular kind of international institution can be evaluated. Each of these general topics will be treated in succeeding sections. The aims of our consultations in general were to discover the character of opinion about the Center from the standpoint of the visiting scientists and their institutions, as well as to elicit from them proposals about the future development of the Center. We also endeavored to determine their attitudes toward the University of Hawaii and its curriculums. We sought to orient the thinking of our consultants toward the particular kinds of need felt by their own countries. We did not limit ourselves to any fixed set of questions, but rather engaged freely in conversation about whatever problems of mutual interest might come up. It should be remembered, however, that our consultants represented principally the biological sciences and, secondly, the social sciences; thus, our conclusions do not necessarily pertain to all aspects of academic and professional interests. It should also be remembered that the combination of good will, engendered by presence in a foreign country, plus insufficient experience about the University of Hawaii, may be reflected in many of the comments. The point of view of the writer is to a large degree that of a naive observer who tried to maintain an objective attitude in all of the issues discussed. The following report presents in an organized way as much of the information obtained as possible. Undoubtedly, there will be many points which are already quite familiar, as well as proposals for activities which may already be planned. Where such duplications exist, our remarks may be treated as additional evidence on those matters. Two considerations made us focus upon matters of an academic and professional character rather than upon selection procedures, student affairs, and other problems of concern to the Center. In the first place, the writer did not feel qualified to go into these questions nor did the delegates themselves appear to be the appropriate objects of such inquiries. In the second place, the voluminous data assembled by the Center team last fall, and by subsequent representatives of the Center, appear to be concerned in large part with these technical issues. Therefore, we felt that our time could better be spent on topics not only of more direct interest to the scientists but also on which less information is presently available. II. ARRANGEMENTS Contact was initially established with East-West Center grantees by letter. They were sent a list of the questions in which we were interested, along with printed material setting forth the objectives and programs of the East-West Center. It was suggested that grantees might profitably prepare themselves ahead of time by acquainting themselves as much as possible with the Center and the university and, if feasible, by conferring with their own colleagues. This advice was carefully followed in a high proportion of the cases. As a result we may accept much of the information given as representative of a wider perspective than that of the particular individual concerned. Consultations were held in offices near the Pacific Science Congress headquarters. This was a great convenience and proved to be highly satisfactory. In addition to the writer, three graduate students in psychology served as paid assistants: Mr. Gerald Meredith, Mr. Kenneth Fujii, and Mrs. Dora Shufang Dien. These three assistants proved to be excellent choices, since they performed an astonishing variety of services without which our project might have been severely hampered. Among such services were the arranging of conferences with all sorts of people in whom the delegates were interested, including officials of the Center, members of the staff of the university, and other people in the outside community. We believe that this function should be regarded as a very serious responsibility of the Center, deserving explicit attention. One of our recommendations will be concerned with this point. Since we could not clearly anticipate the character of our consultations, for a variety of reasons, an effort was made to plan a flexible program. Most of our contacts fell into one of the following categories: A. Orientation and briefing session.-All delegates were invited to attend a meeting on the afternoon of the second day of the Congress, at which time our expectations were outlined and questions were answered. B. Personal interviews.—We were careful to indicate that grantees were under no fixed obligation, since their primary function was to participate in the scientific programs of the Congress. Nevertheless we welcomed private conversations and succeeded in meeting in this way with most of the grantees. In some instances more than one conversation was held, typically during the Congress and following the end of the Congress. C. Scheduled discussion meetings.—On two afternoons, delegates met to deal with questions arising in: (1) The physical and natural sciences, (2) the arts and humanities, (3) the biological sciences, and (4) social sciences. All of these discussions were active and profitable, although attendance varied widely. We were fortunate to secure the services of four outstanding faculty members to act as chairmen of these discussions. These people were Dr. Albert Tester, chairman, department of zoology; Dr. Shelley Mark, director, economic research center; Dr. Richard Kosaki, chairman, department of government; and Dr. Albert Bernatowicz, associate professor of botany. These four persons prepared themselves carefully for their responsibilities and deserve the gratitude of the East-West Center. D. Special conferences with Center officials and university faculty members.— In order to answer questions for which our office was not well suited, we arranged for many special conferences ranging from matters having to do with selection of students and grants to senior scholars, to special programs or courses in university departments. In evaluating these arrangements, it must be admitted that there was considerable duplication of content between the personal interviews and the larger discussions. Nevertheless, each of these two basic procedures has much to recommend it, resulting in different but significant psychological benefits for the Center. Thus the personal interviews permitted a free and, in some instances, confidential, interchange under quite comfortable circumstances, and also enhanced the sense of personal identification in the participants. On the other hand, the discussion sessions may have exemplified some of the emphases in American society upon free and open problem-solving processes. Furthermore, I believe that the four chairmen played an essential role by demonstrating the direct stake of the university faculty in the program of the Center. These psychological and social advantages of our conferences should by no means be minimized. A few remarks prompted by our role in the Congress itself may be in order. As the discussion proceeded, we gained strongly an impression that the East-West Center is and will increasingly become an international institution and thus holds a legitimate place in any meeting or conference of an international character. It might be well to consider the means whereby the Center can, at suitable times, be given a formal place in the programs of conferences, conventions, and so forth. This could take several forms which we shall not elaborate here. But we feel that this is a matter that deserves careful attention in the future. III. GENERAL FINDINGS In the sections below the remarks have been organized in terms of several general topics. These areas represent the most commonly mentioned views expressed by the visiting scientists. It will be convenient to discuss each one in order. Comments pertaining to specific countries which have not otherwise been included will be found in the appendix. A. The East-West Center Even the most casual conversation with educated persons from Asian and Pacific countries sharpens in the mind of the listener the great challenge posed by the East-West Center. There is no doubt that the impact of the Center even at this early stage is incalculable. One scientist commented that he had first heard about it on shortwave radio in the midst of the jungle. There are high hopes and pronounced good will apparent in the reactions of Asians. Of special significance is the hope that the Center may become genuinely a mutual venture. It is essential that the Asian scholars and scientists be made to feel that they have a direct stake in the Center. How this may best be accomplished, of course, remains an open question. Some suggestions will be forthcoming in various contexts below. There is no expectation that the Center will merely cater to the whims of foreigners, and it will be a problem to avoid creating this impression. At the same time it is imperative that there be genuine consultation with Asians and that our interest in their needs be made clear. A point that should be stressed is that Asians are eager to return value for value gained. It would be wise for the Center to explore means whereby visiting students, scientists, and scholars can reciprocate in kind. Many of these developments may perhaps be regarded as an essential function of the Institute of Advanced Projects which we will consider below. In order to present ideas as clearly as possible, the following list may be appropriate : Among 1. There is still very widespread ignorance at the level of the ordinary faculty or research institute member about the East-West Center. This ranges all the way from lack of knowledge about the objectives of the Center through the details of selection and financial arrangements. We raised, with many visitors, the question of how best to inform academic people of the Center. No one answer was given and the procedure may well differ in each country. the suggestions made were the following: Dissemination of fellowship notices for posting on bulletin boards (Australia); notifying department chairmen (Philippines); communicating through university chancellors and/or education ministries (India); placing a notice in the Fulbright bulletin; operating through college deans (New Zealand); working through governmental channels (Pakistan). By and large this present ignorance about the Center is no doubt to be expected since it is probably typical of any new program, but there does seem to be a real need to inform individuals at the level of college faculties. 2. As mentioned above there was repeated stress upon the desirability of taking into account the actual needs of countries in the region in which the Center is interested. 3. There was considerable concern that the programs of the Center may represent "luxury" items divorced from the realities of the situation in which various countries find themselves. Especially significant here was the stress laid upon solution of practical economic problems. This is a familiar enough dilemma bearing upon the fundamental way in which a university can hope to operate. Most people caution against the illusion that academic programs alone will make the Center a meaningful operation. This point is closely tied in with the character of many comments on courses and curriculums as well as suggestions for various joint projects, which we shall consider later. 4. In many countries there are so few highly qualified persons that they can be spared only with great difficulty. It is, therefore, essential that we do not create the impression of robbing significant programs of their personnel. For example, it might be impossible to secure desirable visiting scholars simply because if he leaves even for a year there would be serious disruption in the program for which he is responsible. This suggests that whatever arrangements may be made for bringing into Honolulu scholars or scientists, the question of replacing that individual by someone equally qualified should be carefully considered. This point was also made with respect to junior personnel who might want to work for an advanced degree, but in so doing, the program in question may be left short handed or may be required to utilize second-rate replacements. There are potential sources of friction and resentment here. How serious this is, I cannot evaluate. 5. Future operations may profit from the study of the sorts of mistakes which other international ventures have made. For example, there appear to be ways in which the Fulbright program has erred. Perhaps it would be well to scrutinize various types of international programs to identify the kinds of errors which we might be able to avoid. 6. It was suggested that Asian students are particularly interested in gaining knowledge, experience, and training different from that which can be obtained in their own countries. Admittedly this is rather vague, but nevertheless something to consider. One individual remarked that students were disillusioned with the Friendship University partly because they felt that its program offered no advantages apart from that of their own universities. 7. It was suggested that plans might be worked out to provide for a direct relation with Asian universities by means of which courses taken at the University of Hawaii could be counted toward degrees in those universities. 8. Consultants mentioned that there is some anxiety about preserving the native culture, and that whatever the Center does it must not violate this interest. A delegate from the Philippines remarked "that the East should not be made too westernized." 9. The perennial question of English arose. One point is that highly desirable people may be ineligible because they have not had the necessary language background. Two thoughts occur on this issue. In the first place, it might be desirable for either the Center or the country in question to select potential |