mentioned most often. One statement of this 

 issue came from President Dale R. Corson of 

 Cornell University: 



The first problem I want to mention is what I 

 perceive as a growing tendency of governmentto 

 target the research it sponsors on short-range, 

 high-payoff objectives, to the detriment of both 

 longer-range needs and the education process. 

 We have moved away from the support of people, 

 including students, and away from investment in 

 the future. 



Specifically targeted research, typified by 

 relatively short deadlines and by the request-for- 

 proposals procedure, is not well suited to 

 university research and the training of young 

 scientists. Whatever happened to the old notion 

 that the very best people should be identified and 

 then given an opportunity to explore the leads as 

 they see them? 



The above reply proposes that one of the 

 damaging effects of the pressure for applied 

 research is its effect on the educational process. 

 There is a specific effect on the faculty and their 

 research, according to Eugene H. Man, the Dean 

 of Research Coordination at the University of 

 Miami: 



The drive toward short-term, problem-oriented 

 research in academic institutions is already 

 showing the potential it has for becoming a 

 corrosive factor in this University's capacity for 

 conducting fundamental research programs. 

 Faculty are caught between two pincers: the lure 

 of funds available for producing rapid answers to 

 immediate problems, and the erosion of support 

 for more basic, long-range research. Further, the 

 support continuity for long-term research is 

 missing. 



We see our most talented faculty, responding to 

 the need to keep research programs and 

 organizations intact, moving toward less fun- 

 damental areas because of the lure of more 

 certain funding The eventual result, if this trend 

 continues, will be that our national reservoir of 

 talent for developing the fundamental concepts, 

 on which all applied research must ultimately 

 feed, will become depleted. 



research can be related to stability of funding 

 and the need to maintain the supply of capable 

 scientists, which are issues discussed in 

 previous chapters. 



These two replies suggest that overemphasis 

 on applied research is shortsighted even if one is 

 interested in getting practical results. The 

 respondents generally were not opposed to 

 applied research in itself, but they insisted that 

 basic research also is necessary to guarantee the 

 production of useful technology in the long run. 

 This view is illustrated by the comment of 

 George A. Russell, ViceChancellor for Research 

 and Dean of the Graduate College at the 

 University of Illinois: 



A careful analysis of successful solutions to some 

 of the major problems this nation has faced in the 

 past, whether it be in food production, com- 

 munication, transportation, medicine, etc., will 

 reveal two essential ingredients for success: a 

 core of basic knowledge, generated in most cases 

 from "non-relevant" research, and a cadre of well- 

 trained individuals who can extend and expand or 

 re-direct their fundamental research to the 

 solution of the pressing problems of the time. In 

 the corn country of Illinois, we do not today reap 

 150-200 bushels of corn to the acre because we 

 set this as a goal, and did "relevant" research to 

 achieve that goal, but because basic "non- 

 relevant" research in plant genetics helped to 

 obtain the fundamental insights needed to make 

 the slow but steady progress in agricultural 

 technology that was required. 



The views seen so far came from university 

 presidents and vice presidents. Table E-l of the 

 Appendix shows that these respondents men- 

 tioned the pressure for applied rather than basic 

 research more frequently than any other issue. 

 That is true for both Carnegie Research Univer- 

 sities I and Universities II. It is also true for 

 department chairmen. However, there were 

 certain classes of disciplines, engineering in 

 particular, in which the chairmen did not rate 

 this issue as first. Engineers actually rated it 

 quite low. 



Dean Man here shows how freedom in The responses from chairmen illustrate this 



60 



FREEDOM IN THE RESEARCH SYSTEM 



