National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

HARDBACK
price:$47.00
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

50 Years of Ocean Discovery: National Science Foundation 1950-2000 (2000)
Commission on Geosciences, Environment and Resources (CGER)
Ocean Studies Board (OSB)

Citation Manager

. "Education in Oceanography: History, Purpose, and Prognosis." 50 Years of Ocean Discovery: National Science Foundation 1950-2000. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2000.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
197
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


50 Years of Ocean Discovery: National Science Foundation 1950—2000

Efforts should be made in the research and survey programs to use larger numbers of assistants at the Bachelor's and Master's level to utilize more efficiently the limited number of persons available at the doctoral level.

The third, and arguably most influential report on oceanography, was published in 1969. It is often referred to as the Stratton Report but its full title is Our Nation and the Sea: A Plan for National Action (CMSER, 1969). However, this report is as weak as the Lillie Report in its recognition of the role and responsibilities of education on oceanography. It makes just two recommendations in relation to education:

NOAA [should] be assigned responsibility to help assure that the Nation's marine manpower needs are satisfied and to help devise uniform standards for nomenclature of marine occupations. (Note NOAA wisely, or by default, did not achieve this!)

NSF should expand its support for undergraduate and graduate education in the basic marine-related disciplines and plan post-doctoral programs in consultation with academic and industrial marine communities.

Hence, forty years after the Lillie Report, education in ocean sciences was largely ignored at the federal level and the individual institutions devised their own responses to local educational needs as well as the perceived national research agenda. The growth of graduate programs in the 1950s and 1960s was in large measure a response to the lack of trained staff, so that both master' s and doctoral programs were created. NAS (1959) made many recommendations about increasing support for students and suggesting stronger ties between oceanographic labs and academic institutions. These recommendations focused almost exclusively on the graduate level.

EDUCATION IN THE OCEAN SCIENCES: WHAT IS THE POINT?

As the NAS reports did not provide any insight into the role and goals of education in oceanography in the first years of the development of our field, it is now appropriate to ask a series of questions. These questions are not new. Since 1979, a group of deans and directors of academic programs in the United States have met biennially to share information and discuss shared issues related to graduate education. Called the "Deans' Retreat," these meetings were catalyzed by Charley Hollister and Jake Peirson of Woods Hole, and I worked with the group for 17 years ensuring the development of a database for our discussions (Nowell and Hollister, 1988, 1990). The data are now available through the Consortium for Oceanographic Research and Education (http://core.cast.msstate.edu/oserintro.html) and the biennial meetings are called the "Ocean Sciences Educators Retreat"

Is Our Role Simply to Produce Professionals? If you attend a meeting of oceanographers you will almost always hear the clarion call that we are producing too many Ph.D.s— new competition who are sometimes out-competing the established scientists. And, if you ever ask in a group why we have doctoral programs, you will hear a uniform response. We want excellent students who are creative and imaginative to assist in transforming the field, and we want the field to expand to absorb these new scientists. But is that the role of academic departments at universities, or is that just one of many responsibilities? In some fields, such as dentistry, the objective of achieving the professional qualification is to practice the art and skills learned. I can think of no other reason for obtaining a DDS degree than to practice dentistry. In the case of a medical degree the objective is overwhelmingly to produce practicing physicians. Does obtaining a law degree mean you will practice law? I would say overwhelmingly yes, unless you choose to enter politics! (Maybe that explains the difference in regard for learning between 1860 and 1999.) But, does an advanced degree in physics mean you are going to become an academic physicist, or does an advanced degree in oceanography mean you can only become a faculty member undertaking research? Table 1 indicates that the answers to these last two questions show a surprising variance. More physicists than oceanographers enter industry than become academics by a factor of three and almost 50 percent more oceanographers enter research in oceanography than engage in research in physics. Is this a consequence of the structure of our field, in which the overwhelming majority of students are supported on research assistantships versus being supported on teaching assistantships or fellowships? Today, a more eclectic vision is emerging among faculty that recognizes and even encourages students to consider careers besides becoming a federally supported researcher. Faculty are recognizing that the relationship of educator to the student is more than the relationship of crafts-person to apprentice.

TABLE 1 Employment of Ph.D. Degree Recipients

 

Ocean Sciences (%)

Physics (%)

Industry

10

35

Government

14

10

University

60

36

Other (FFRDC)

16

19

TOTAL

100

100

NOTE: FFRDC = Federally Funded Research and Development Center.

Is Our Role to Produce Scientifically Literate and Numerically Adept Graduates Who Enter a Wide Range of Professions ? One way to answer this question is to look at the employment patterns from our field and compare them with another field such as physics. Tables 2 and 3 compare master's and bachelor's degree employment, respectively, for oceanography and physics.

Page
197
Front Matter (R1-R6)
Keynote Lecture The Emergence of the National Science Foundation as a Supporter of Ocean Sciences in the United States (1-8)
Landmark Achievements of Ocean Sciences Achievements in Biological Oceanography (9-21)
Achievements in Chemical Oceanography (22-43)
Achievements in Physical Oceanography (44-50)
Achievements in Marine Geology and Geophysics (51-64)
Deep Submergence: The Beginnings of Alvin as a Tool of Basic Research (65-66)
The History of Woods Hole's Deep Submergence Program (67-84)
Creating Institutions to Make Scientific Discoveries Possible A Chronology of the Early Development of Ocean Sciences at NSF (85-92)
Ocean Sciences at the National Sciences Foundation: Early Revolution (93-95)
Ocean Sciences at the National Sciences Foundation: An Administrative History (96-106)
Two Years of Turbulence Leading to a Quarter Century of Cooperation: The Birth of UNOLS (107-116)
Scientific Ocean Drilling, from AMSOC to COMPOST (117-127)
Technology Development for Ocean Sciences at NSF (128-134)
Large and Small Science Programs: A Delicate Balance The Great Importance of “Small” Science Programs (135-140)
The Role of NSF in “Big” Ocean Science: 1950 to 1980 (141-148)
Major Physical Oceanography Programs at NSF: IDOE Through Global Change (149-151)
Major International Programs in Ocean Sciences: Ocean Chemistry (152-162)
Ocean Sciences Today and Tomorrow The Future of Physical Oceanography (163-168)
The Future of Ocean Chemistry in the United States (169-171)
The Future of Marine Geology and Geophysics: A Summary (172-183)
Out Far and In Deep: Shifting Perspectives in Ocean Ecology (184-191)
Global Ocean Science: Toward an Integrated Approach (192-194)
Education in Oceanography: History, Purpose, and Prognosis (195-200)
Evolving Institutional Arrangements for U.S. Ocean Sciences (201-206)
NSF's Commitment to the Deep (207-209)
Fifty Years of Ocean Discovery (210-211)
Argo to ARGO (212-213)
The Importance of Ocean Sciences to Society (214-216)
Appendix A: Symposium Program (217-222)
Appendix B: Symposium Participants (223-232)
Appendix C: Poster Session (233-234)
Appendix D: NSF Division of Ocean Sciences: Senior Science Staff, Rotators, IPAs, and Visiting Sciences (235-246)
Appendix E: Support of Ocean Sciences at NSF from 1966 to 1999 (247-249)
Appendix F: Organizational Charts (250-257)
Appendix G: NRC Project Oversight (258-258)
Appendix H: Acronyms (259-262)
Index (263-270)
Supplementary Pictures (271-278)