The CHAIRMAN. Doctor, we want to express our deep appreciation to you, sir. It was fine of you to come here and be with us today. I know you are a busy man with many duties and many responsibilities. You have afforded us the benefit of your knowledge, your experience, and your wisdom. You have been most helpful to us. We are certainly grateful to you.

Dr. HOVDE. Thank you, Senator.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will now stand recessed until 10 in the morning, at which time our witness will be Dr. Morris Meister, principal of the Bronx High School of Science of New York City.

(Whereupon, at 11:15 a. m., the hearing was recessed until 10 a. m., Wednesday, January 29, 1958.)

SCIENCE AND EDUCATION FOR NATIONAL DEFENSE

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 29, 1958

UNITED STATES SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND PUBLIC WELFARE,

Washington, D. C.

The committee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to recess, in the Old Supreme Court Chamber of the Capitol, Senator Lister Hill (chairman) presiding.

Present: Senators Hill (presiding), Thurmond, and Allott. Committee staff members present: Stewart E. McClure, chief clerk; Roy E. James, assistant chief clerk; John S. Forsythe, general counsel; and Michael J. Bernstein, professional staff member.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order.

Our witness this morning is Dr. Morris Meister, principal of the Bronx High School of Science in New York City. Dr. Meister was educated in New York City public schools. He received his bachelor of science degree at the College of the City of New York and his master's and doctor's degrees at Columbia University.

During his long career in education, Dr. Meister has been a science teacher at the Horace Mann School and a science lecturer at City College, New York University, and the University of Wisconsin. He was head of the science department of the New York Teachers Training College and science supervisor in the New York City public schools.

He is the author of a science textbook series published by Charles Scribner's Sons. He is a past president of the National Science Teachers Association.

During World War II, he developed science courses for Gen. Brehon Somervell. We know General Somervell had charge of the mobilization of all of our resources so far as the Army of the United States was concerned.

Dr. Meister, you are the founder of one of the most interesting high schools in the United States. You have been principal of the Bronx High School for Science since it was established in 1938, and I am advised that you have just been elected president of the Bronx Community College, to take office on this forthcoming Saturday, February 1.

We congratulate you, Doctor, on assuming the presidency of this college and we are honored to have you with us. We are delighted to have you proceed in your own way.

STATEMENT OF DR. MORRIS MEISTER, PRINCIPAL OF THE BRONX HIGH SCHOOL OF SCIENCE, NEW YORK CITY

Dr. MEISTER. Thank you, Senator. I am honored to be called before you and to give of my experience and thought with reference to this very vital problem of science education and national defense.

I was very much interested, Senator, in your referring to my having worked for General Somervell during World War II. I would like to begin, if I may, with some experiences that I had in the Pentagon building where I spent about a year because the situation in some ways is somewhat comparable to what we face in this country today. As you may recall, when World War II broke out it became very clear that we would need to induct into the Armed Forces young people at the age of 18. That meant that for most of our youth the high school was the terminal point of their education. It soon became clear that warfare, even in the days of World War II, was based on a great deal of scientific technology.

WARTIME SCIENCE INSTRUCTION

It then became important to give in the high school course a modified program of science instruction which would help pave the way for the GI and make him familiar with all sorts of technologies.

At that time we were concerned about gas warfare, you may recall, and it did not eventuate but the mechanisms and the utilization of electronic equipment all meant that there had to be something extra in the background and in the education of these youngsters. The last chance we had to give them that training was in the high school.

I was called in and I was given a sabbatical leave by the New York City Board of Education in order to devise a group of courses which were then called preinduction courses.

We developed about 12 of them. Some of the staff from the Bronx High School of Science faculty were with me. We made a very careful study of the manuals that the Army and the Navy were producing and we took out of these manuals the basic ideas of a program of science instruction to be given in the high school.

About 20 publishers agreed to produce textbooks which would correspond with the courses we had drafted. Then some of us were sent to different parts of the country. I know I had a trip that took me all of the way to the coast in order to help high schools to introduce these preinduction courses in the sciences.

Now, the reason I mention this is that at that time, when we were in a hot war, we were not worried about Federal control of education. We were not concerned about squeezing the humanities out of our educational programs. A hot war developed a sense of urgency; those who want their country to win as soon as possible will subordinate any other considerations to the needs of the moment.

THE COLD WAR

It was also possible at any time that some weapon or some technique would be developed which would bring defeat to the enemy and very quickly. But when we are engaged in a cold war, which is the situation today, it is difficult to undertake bold and imaginative action.

I think the basic reason is that a great many of us have indulged in wishful thinking concerning the future. Or, perhaps, some of us are unwilling to face the future. It is always rather pleasant to apply soothing sirup and to say, "Oh, well, these things cannot happen to us. Our country will always be first. Our technology and our know-how will pull us through this coming emergency as it always has in the past."

I am not one to indulge in soothing sirup, Senator. I feel we really have reached a critical situation in the world, a situation that demands that we examine our educational system and discover its weaknesses, assess its strengths, and apply remedies wherever we can.

DEAD CENTER OF INACTION

I feel that one of the difficulties we are facing today is that we are as a people on what might be called a dead center of inaction. I think that I can explain this a bit better if I refer to my notes and indicate what I see happening everywhere.

If a scientist or an educator urges us to stop being complacent about the Russian challenge, immediately there comes the equal and opposite reaction, "Well, now, let us not panic!"

Complacency is thus pitted against hysteria. Possibly there may be an inbetween position to take but these two opposing views keep us on dead center.

Here is another example, if a proposal is made to put more science and mathematics into the school curriculum, we get the warning from many places, "Well, now, let us not squeeze the humanities out of the picture."

No one wants to squeeze the humanities out of the picture. But have we considered the fact that the humanities have not always been the same since the days of antiquity.

Actually the humanities, so-called, have changed; they have evolved. To my way of thinking, and the impact of the sciences upon our ways of living entitle the sciences to a place among the humanities. Science can be taught as a humanity; there is no necessary contradiction between the two.

Here is another case where action and reaction keep us on a dead center of immobility. When people indicate that the facts show that we need more technologies to carry on, be it in a cold war or a hot war or in peace, then the counter-attack comes. We need quality and not quantity.

BOTH QUALITY AND QUANTITY

Of course we need quality; we also need quantity. Let us not sacrifice the liberal arts. No one wants to do that. If someone says that there is a serious shortage of qualified teachers of science and mathematics and we want to do something about it-perhaps we want to provide some inducements so that more of our able young people will become teachers of science and mathematics-immediately comes the counterreaction and protest, "Let us not make any invidious comparisons among teachers of different subjects.'

A suggestion may be made that we offer many more scholarships to students for science and mathematics and then comes the reply: "Is it not immoral to push individuals into careers?"