Table 8.7 summarizes some data, drawn principally from OECD sources, on the levels of effort being put into higher education in several advanced countries in the mid-sixties. To facilitate comparisons, the second part of the table shows the data normalized to a figure of 100 for the U.S. Perhaps the most striking feature of these data is the completely different emphasis placed by Japan (and the Soviet Union) on the distribution of resources between the educating of scientists and engineers. Compared with the U.S. in the mid-sixties, Japan was educating proportionally far fewer science students and far more engineering students at the first degree level. The ratio of science to engineering students in Japan was about one-tenth of that in the U.S. while, in proportion to the population of the labor force, the total number of Japanese students (all disciplines) was about one-third of the U.S. total. At the doctorate level, Japan also was producing far fewer science and engineering graduates than the United States.

While there are differences among the educational patterns of Canada, France, Germany and the U.K., none is so different from the U.S. picture as is Japan. Nevertheless, it should be observed that all other countries, and especially the U.K., were devoting a greater proportion of their higher education effort to science and engineering than to other disciplines.

By comparing 1955 with 1965 data (Figure 8.1), trends in emphasis on science (S) vs. engineering (E) enrollments for university-level education can also be discerned; these are summarized as follows:

These data strongly confirm the view that at a time when Japan was relatively early on its sigmoidal curve compared with other advanced countries, it chose a policy of emphasizing engineering rather than science in order to “catch-up” technologically. If what seems to be the national scenario can be applied more narrowly to an industrial sector, then part of the Japanese prescription for a lagging industry is to increase the national effort in the relevant applied science and engineering education.

Now that Japan has caught up in many ways, it is of interest to see whether the same formula will move Japan forward to establish an overall technological lead or whether its investment mix in science and engineering education will move closer to those of the other countries. It is noticeable, for instance, that up till now Japan has lagged considerably behind the western countries in Nobel Prizes for science, imperfect indicator though this may be of national scientific leadership. (1–2/3 physics; 0 chemistry; out of 73 awards in each field).

The U.S. appears to have led the way in establishing interdisciplinary materials science centers for working towards advanced degrees at universities. In other countries, education for the materials field still seems to follow mainly along traditional departmental lines—physics, chemistry, metallurgy—though a few of the newer universities, for example in the U.K. (see below), are developing interdisciplinary undergraduate curricula somewhat similar to the broader approach common in U.S. colleges. It is difficult to make meaningful comparisons of the curricula for science and engineering students among various countries let alone assess the quality of the education vis-a-vis that of the U.S.

In England, the University of Sussex, founded in 1961, was designed from the start to operate with an innovatory curriculum and with a new form of internal organization. The unit of university development was to be not the

single-discipline department but a multidiscipline school, with interdisciplinary courses in each school. The schools included Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Molecular Sciences, Biological Sciences, and Applied Sciences.

Undergraduate education was to combine specialization in one discipline with common work in clusters of disciplines. The plan also entailed replacing the department with a professorial head by a school with a dean, part of whose responsibility would be to encourage multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary work.

In the sciences, a common introductory course was developed on “The Structure and Properties of Matter,” to be taken by all science undergraduates and stressing concepts cutting across traditional disciplines. At a later stage in the undergraduate program, courses were designed linking Biological and Physical Sciences and other scientific disciplines. The School of Applied Sciences abandoned the old professional distinctions between Mechanical, Electrical and Civil Engineering, and introduced new common courses on subjects like Control Engineering and Materials Science.

Some tentative conclusions about the Sussex experience can now be drawn:

Capital requirements of universities and the support of undergraduate education in the U.K. are largely the responsibility of the University Grants Committee (UGC) of the Department of Education and Science. The UGC has recently assessed educational needs in the field of “Materials Studies,” covering mainly metallurgy, ceramics and glass technology, polymers, and electronic materials. The UGC found that the emphasis of materials studies varies from university to university, ranging from heavy concentration on the engineering use of materials, and sometimes on their preparation, to emphasis on the structure and behavior of the material per se, usually involving close links with departments of applied chemistry and applied physics. They conclude that there is no single block of work that can be labelled materials studies and treated as a comprehensive discipline.

Comparison is made with the USA where they note that the traditional patterns of departmental structures have been modified in favor of the growth of interdisciplinary organizations such as materials science centers, and this has stimulated the treatment of neglected but important areas of materials research. “Over the years, however, the tendency has been for the centers to become divorced from the teaching functions of the original departments. The centers have also been criticised for lack of technological motivation or interest and failure to build up their contacts and interrelationship with industry to the degree that had at one time been hoped.”

In the U.K. the following forms of organization occur: Undergraduate level

Interdisciplinary graduate courses centered on metallurgy are usually successful in attracting high quality students if they are organized in close collaboration with industry. The tendency for research in metallurgy is for it to broaden across disciplinary lines, leading university research workers to think more in interdisciplinary terms just as industry has to. For historical reasons, large research schools in metallurgy are often located in centers of the metallurgical industry, thereby enhancing the opportunities for university-industry coupling, although questions are being raised whether there is some overlap and redundancy in the overall metallurgical effort which might be rationalized. One of the problems encountered in regard to university-industry coupling is that where a large proportion of undergraduates are industrially based, as they are in the technological universities, it is very difficult to build up a strong research school. The research has, therefore, tended to be shorter-term, much of it on a contract-basis for industry.

There are two principal schools for ceramics and glass science and technology—Leeds and Sheffield. The total output of graduates per annum for these and other schools is about 40. There is an uncertain demand for such graduates at present and in consequence, the addition of any more ceramics or glass schools is not being encouraged.

Polymer science and technology is finding its way into an increasing number of academic syllabuses, often as a specialized option in the latter years of metallurgical courses. However, polymer science as such is not regarded as a suitable subject for a complete first degree course in the present stage of development, but more as a graduate course based on a sound undergraduate foundation in physics and chemistry. At the graduate research level, much progress has been made at implementing the interdisciplinary approach but more needs to be done to equip polymer scientists for work in industry.

The study of electronic materials at universities has generally grown up in departments of electronics, electrical engineering, and applied physics, and is likely to continue so. The strongest departments appear to be those in which teaching and research are closely integrated and, in particular, where the materials research is aimed specifically at device applications. However, collaboration with departments of physics, chemistry, etc. can be fostered by the sharing of common facilities such as electron microscopes, X-ray equipment, etc. This seems to be preferred to the establishment of materials centers where the motivation of technological application is often absent.

Many universities appear unwilling to appraise critically the quality of their work in materials studies relative to their resources and abilities. Some research programs are superficial, others are poorly supported.

This leads to the question of universities establishing research centers in “materials science.” The general idea of universities interested in centers is that they would concentrate mainly on contract work for industry or government, and as such would be particularly fitted to conduct medium-term research and to attract postdoctoral fellows. One center has not been a success apparently because it failed to gain sufficient moral and financial support from the contributing departments. This is liable to happen unless the departments concerned are convinced that it is in their long-term interests to give up a proportion of the research they would otherwise undertake, together with the limitation of research opportunities this is bound to cause for their own staff. The UGC suggests therefore that universities should approach the idea of a research center with caution. Their present attitude is to discourage the development of additional centers until more experience is gained from the operation of existing ones in Britain.

As regards the administration of Materials Studies, where the oversight is vested in a Council, or Board of Studies, or Faculty Board, the general arrangement is for the main departments involved to be represented on the Council or Board, although the arrangements for the chairing of such a body vary a good deal. A conscious and sustained effort is required of university staffs to maintain the vitality and advantages of such interdepartmental organizations and to prevent them from recrystallizing into a collection of individual departments with little concern for each other’s activities in Materials Studies.

There has been a decline in the undergraduate enrollment for metallurgy and materials science courses of 18% over the period 1965–1970, although within this total decline, the enrollment for materials courses has increased fourfold while that for metallurgy alone has declined by 35%. This is attributed to the increasingly favorable image of materials science, and to the desire of students to keep their options open as long as possible. As a result, it is felt in the U.K. that an increasing proportion of students of only moderate ability are entering metallurgy courses and, in consequence, no more university departments of metallurgy should be established in the near future. There has also been a tendency recently to emphasize physical metallurgy at the expense of chemical metallurgy; however, extractive metallurgy has begun to feature more prominently in some university syllabuses. The signs are that the latter subjects collect the somewhat less able students who are destined for careers in production rather than research.

The breadth of materials science courses makes it more difficult to cover production technology than in metallurgical courses. Another disadvantage of the broad approach is that many companies to which students subsequently go are specialized into certain classes of materials—metals, ceramics, polymers or electronic materials. Thus, advantages are seen in materials courses which start out broadly but then give an opportunity to specialize in the final year. But universities should be wary of giving broad courses to weak students. There is some danger that a first degree in materials science (or materials technology), dealing with so many topics that none can be studied in depth, will produce a man who cannot be said to have professional training for a career in any particular field. Universities should embark on such programs only if they are confident that they will attract high quality students. A first degree course in one of the older established disciplines, followed by a graduate course in a more specialized aspect of materials, is seen as a good way for training materials scientists.

In conclusion, the UGC finds that in the U.K. the concept of a materials studies school is not in every case as successful as claimed by the university concerned; collaboration between departments in the school can sometimes be more on paper than in practice. Whatever the local arrangements may be, a conscious and sustained effort is required of university staffs to maintain the vitality and advantages of such interdepartmental organizations and to prevent them from recrystallizing into a collection of individual departments.

UGC has also concluded that the development of additional materials science centers should be discouraged until experience is gained from the operation of the few existing ones in Britain. Also, universities should persevere with arrangements which make possible the transfer of undergraduates to metallurgy or materials science courses after the first or second year of a science course in another field.

Materials studies should be a proper, fully integrated and continuing part of any engineering course, whatever the specialist engineering discipline, and not simply regarded as a first year topic to be “got out of the way.”

Universities wishing to provide courses covering new topics and founded on new integrating principles should do this only if they are confident that they can obtain enough students of high calibre; and they should be ready to suppress these courses if the good students fail to appear in sufficient numbers.

In these circumstances, universities might experiment by first providing the broader courses at graduate level following on from a first degree in one of the older established disciplines. Only a university which had made successful provision along these lines should then contemplate provision also of a first degree course in materials science for able students.

There are advantages in operating materials courses with a broad introduction to all materials, provided there is the opportunity to take a specialist option in the final year.

The most important of the National Universities of Japan are the seven former Imperial Universities. These receive a large share of their financial support directly from the Japanese government, attract the best students, and do most of the nation’s academic research. The University of Tokyo is considered the most prestigious and its graduates succeed to many of the important positions in government, education and industry. In close succession follow the Universities of Kyoto and Osaka, and the other four (Tohoku, Nagoya, Hokkaido, and Kyushu) in less definite order. Career prospects for graduates seem to be pegged accordingly.

The larger universities are divided into several campuses, each accommodating one of the major divisions of the university, e.g., faculty of medicine, faculty of arts and sciences, etc. The faculty of science may comprise physics, chemistry, biology, etc., each with its own chairman. The role of chairman is not quite as strong as in the U.S. since individual professors within a department enjoy a semi-autonomous position as heads of their respective research units, each of which has its own permanent budget granted directly by the Ministry of Education.

Often associated with a National University are one or more National Institutes, somewhat like the Lincoln Laboratory associated with M.I.T. Thus, the Institute for Solid State Physics is managed by a board of physics professors from the Institute itself and from the University of Tokyo. Each National Institute is devoted to a specific technical field usually restricted in scope but pursued at considerable depth. Some Institutes accept graduate students who do thesis work under a professor permanently assigned to the Institute, but more frequently the best graduate students are retained by the parent university.

The Ministry of Education, with its power to determine budgets for research and education, exercises extraordinary power over the academic and intellectual community throughout Japan. Participation by prominent professors in the decisions of the Ministry helps to make it partly responsive to local requirements.

Examinations for university entrance are the sole admissions criterion, each university designing its own examination. The four-year undergraduate curriculum is divided into 1–1/2 or 2 junior years and 2–1/2 or 2 senior years. In general, the senior course is highly specialized with emphasis on deep knowledge within a given field. Graduate school consists of a 2-year “Master” course and a 3-year (or more) “Doctor” course of research, the two separated by a stiff examination. Upon graduation, arrangements for a position for the graduate as an assistant in some university, or in industry, are usually made through personal contacts by his thesis professor. The American practice of postdoctoral fellowships is not generally followed. After 5 years or so as an assistant, he may be promoted to assistant professor at some university. At this level he then enjoys considerable independence. The final promotional step is to professor, a position in which he has much freedom and prestige.

A typical research organization at a university is organized rather differently from that of the American university department. Each research unit, called a koza, consists of one professor, one assistant professor, and one or two assistants, and it is funded directly by the Ministry of Education. Several graduate students are connected with the koza as well as one or more technicians and a secretary. There is usually a close-knit family air about a koza with considerable deference being paid to the professor. However, the traditional koza system is more strongly upheld by older professors than by younger ones, and the competing advantages of less formal arrangements are being felt in many Japanese laboratories. For example, instances can be noted of cooperation between professors in several adjacent koza, grouping and regrouping informally as the scientific occasion may demand. Likewise, at the National Institutes less importance is attached to the koza tradition and the atmosphere may be more like that prevalent in the U.S.

Research style is rather different in Japan compared to the U.S. In the U.S. most scientists discover new ideas partly by contemplation and partly by informal discussions with colleagues. Ideas are then tried out by exploratory experiments, the results of which lead to further rounds of informal discussion, and so on. In Japan, such informal preliminary discussions are rarely held. It is customary for a research worker to spend a very long time in private thought before advancing his ideas to the rest of his koza at a formal research seminar where he is naturally more likely to strive for accuracy than to be speculative. Furthermore, intellectual aggresiveness is not admired in Japan and criticisms in seminars tend to be gentle.

Japanese education in MSE is generally organized along disciplinary rather than interdisciplinary lines. While some Metallurgy Departments have broadened their title to include Materials Science, this generally means adding such topics as the physics of metals and does not necessarily indicate a broadening of the scope into inorganic and electronic materials or polymers and plastics. In the following, therefore, the educational picture will be described according to its material components. Metallurgy, Metallurgical Engineering, and Materials Science:

The demand for metallurgy and materials science graduates in Japan is high and even increasing. For example, at Tohoku University the number of offers made in 1970 to 168 graduates was 548.

An interesting sociological sidelight is that members of the faculty act as intermediaries in arranging jobs for graduates with various companies; the students and the companies are not allowed to make direct contact with each other. In addition, there appears to be a gentlemen’s agreement between the head of the department and various companies aimed at avoiding wasteful competition between companies for the graduates.

The graduate production in 1970 is listed for all universities in Table 8.8.

One of the best known schools in the materials field is at Tohoku University, comprising the Departments of Metallurgy, Materials Science, and Metal Processing. This school is indicative of the nature and quality of Japanese education in this field.

The Department of Metallurgy was established in 1923. The Department of Materials Science was founded in 1960. The Department of Metal Processing was started in 1965 and became fully operational in 1968. At present, the three departments are administered as a single unit with professors belonging to different departments participating in teaching throughout the unit. All students take the same course for the first three years, specializing in one of the departments for their fourth year.

Also associated with Tohoku University is the Research Institute for Iron, Steel and Other Metals and the Research Institute for Mineral Dressing and Metallurgy. Professors associated with these Institutes also participate in the graduate work of the University.

Following the four-year undergraduate course students may go on for a Master’s degree (minimum 2 years) or a Doctor’s degree (minimum 3 years).

There are six professorial chairs in each of the three departments. These are: Department of Metallurgy—Chemical Metallurgy and Chemical Engineering Group—Ferrous Metallurgy; Nonferrous Metallurgy; Electrometallurgy; Corrosion and Protection of Metals and Alloys; Metallurgical Engineering; Chemical Metallurgy. Department of Materials Science—Physical Metallurgy and Materials Science Group—Structural Metals and Alloys; Special Purpose Materials; Physical Metallurgy; Strength of Metals and Alloys; Chemistry of Metals; Metal Physics. Department of Metal Processing—Metal Processing and Mechanical Metallurgy Group—Foundry Engineering; Welding Engineering; Powder Metallurgy; Mechanical Metallurgy; Plastic Working of Metals; Interface Science of Metals.

Solid-state physics is part of the normal curriculum for undergraduates in most, if not all, of the physics departments in Japan, and most of these departments possess one or more koza in solid-state physics for graduate work. Those universities which are particularly strong in solid-state physics are Tokyo, Osaka, Nagoya, and Kyushu.

At Osaka University, solid-state physics is carried on in the Physics Department proper, the Department of Engineering Science (Materials Science), the Faculty of Engineering, and in the Institute for Scientific and Industrial Research.

The University of Tokyo became dominant in the field of solid-state physics in Japan with the creation of the Institute for Solid State Physics in 1957 upon the recommendation of the Science Council of Japan with the concurrence of the Science and Technology Agency and the Ministry of Education. The major purpose of the Institute is to carry on basic research in solid-state physics, thereby promoting rapid development in the field, a field “which has many applications for improving industrial technology.” The Institute is perhaps the finest and best-equipped laboratory of its kind in Japan and has already earned world-wide renown. However, although an express purpose is to offer opportunities, when appropriate, for joint programs and to provide facilities for visiting scientists from other institutions, a strong koza system operates.

Higher education in the materials field is generally carried out in the “grandes écoles.” These are engineering schools into which candidates enter after highly competitive examinations. Typically the emphasis in these schools is towards a broad, theoretical training, leaving the question of practical experience to subsequent employment.

There are 140 such schools, 30 of which are concerned with military, broad engineering, or general scientific studies. The remaining 110 schools specialize in various sectors of engineering—see Table 8.9.

It appears that metallurgical education in the Soviet Union is concentrated in relatively few institutions, some of which are enormous by Western standards (thousands of students). Contact with industry is often

close and industrial equipment is frequently used in the research activities of the universities and institutes. Most institutes are mainly single-disciplined in their staffing but the Institute of Metal Physics recruits staff from various disciplines. Young people, especially solid-state physicists and physical chemists, are preferred though they need “seasoning” by exposure to metallurgists.

Students, either directly from secondary school (at age 18) or from industry (up to age 35), go to teaching institutes which are rather similar to the German “Technische Hochschule.” There, they study for the Diploma (5–1/2–6 years of undergraduate study), Candidate (3 years of graduate study) and Doctor’s degrees. Included in the training for the Diploma is considerable practical experience, making the students qualified engineers on graduation. However, the practical experience may be dispensed with in institutes where the emphasis is on science. In the final year or so of study, the students specialize, working in smaller classes with a fair amount of tutorials, and they also prepare a thesis. In their final year, undergraduates may be sent to a national research institute (e.g. Institute for Metal Physics) to finish off the Diploma work.

Higher degrees may be awarded by both teaching and research Institutes. The Candidate degree compares with the Ph.D. Several examinations have to be passed during the course of study, usually on theoretical background.

There has been growing emphasis in Russia on the physical and fundamental aspects of metallurgy and a few national research institutes have played a large part in this process, not only in their actual work but by general influence. For example, senior scientists at research institutes may take professorships at teaching institutes for a certain period. Their experience and basic approach is reflected in the instruction at the teaching institute and tends to strengthen the treatment of the fundamental background of the subject.

Financial support for the teaching institute comes partly from the Ministry of Higher Education which supports both teaching and research activities, and partly from industry which pays for research on specific industrial problems carried out on a contract basis.