903 



from which they can conduct . . . studies, and the absence of research awards 

 . . . reduces . . . applications. The absence of grants in the sciences [is a 

 problem]. 8^ 



After several years of trying to conduct a "package" program for American 

 lecturers in the sciences, the Foundation in Taipei is shifting to a more open 

 program, . . . because U.S. matching parts of the "packages" have proved 

 virtually impossible to find.^^ 



Openings in Argentina . . . require candidates able to lecture fluently in 

 Spanish. This requirement . . . has caused the Committee often to recommend 

 candidates who have held previous grants either in Argentina or in other countries 

 of Latin America.^' 



The Discrepancy Between Foreign Policy and the Nature oj Scientific 

 Inquiry. — A number of factors explain the low rate of U.S. scientific 

 and technical participation in Fulbright-Hays educational exchange 

 programs in the developing countries. One of the more important is 

 the discrepancy between the foreign policy objectives of the program 

 and the natiire of scientific inquiry. Foreign policy factors have 

 influenced not only the thrust of the program, but also its content, 

 funds available to support it, attitudes of participating scientists, 

 and the activities of grantees while abroad. 



Francis Young, director of the CIEP since its inception to 1970, 

 explains that participation rates ebb and flow in relation to the 

 political connotation of the program. When the program was first 

 established it supported free scholarship and educational exchange, 

 thereby attracting an eager group of candidates: 



[The program] initially [emphasized] free scholarship, intellectual abihty, 

 and an open competition. [It was] a product of the immediate post-war American 

 idealism. . . . There were ... at the beginning no political burdens ... to 

 carry. The "cold war" was stUl in its early stages, and what appealed . . . was the 

 idea of converting swords into ploughshares by means of a world-wide educa- 

 tional exchange program in which the government and the academic community 

 worked as partners.^" 



Then, beginning in 1953, with, intensification of the Cold War, 

 the program became increasingly involved with overt foreign policy 

 goals. Scholarly research and educational activities were subordinated 

 to the achievement of national objectives overseas, resulting in a 

 program — 



. . . oriented more toward the interest of the United States and the other 

 participating countries, as defined by their governments and their representa- 

 tives . . . and less toward the interest of individual scholars . . . J^ 



Educational exchanges thereafter took on a new role "over and 

 beyond the traditional one of personal development and the advance- 

 ment of scholarship." Research and educational exchange were 

 subordinated as the program began rapidly to take on "character- 

 istics of an international extension service." ^^ The individualism of 

 the program, its attractiveness for noted scholars, and its status and 

 effectiveness abroad, rapidly declined as the program became more 



«' Ibid., p. 32. 



8« Ibid., p. 15. 



6« Tbid., p. 16. 



'• Francis A. Young, "The Conference Board of Associated Kesearch Councils in the United States: 

 A Brief Historical Account with Special Reference to National and International Manpower Problems," 

 Social Science Information (June 1965), p. 121. 



n Ibid., p. 122. 



" Ibid., p. 123. 



