Education - Some Postwar Problems in Geological Engineering Education (Mining Tech., Nov. 1948, TP 2493)

All engineering education is faced by certain basic problems, three of which seem to have particular present importance in geological engineering training in general, and in respect to training for oil field geo-exploratory work in particular. Problem i The first of these problems has to do with present and future educational objectives and with the numbers and qualities of the men who should be coming out of our geo-exploratory training programs. Before the war we needed ever-increasing numbers of graduates at the Bachelor's level and a very much smaller number of men who had reached the Doctorate degree. Now, with more difficult, more extensive, and more costly exploratory work; with a rapid expansion of company "staff" activities, and with the initiation of many new research organizations and laboratories; it is clear that men of exceptional ability will be more and more in demand, and that the schools will need to carry a greater proportion of their students through to the Ph.D, degree. Problem 2 Assuming that the mineral industries will need an increasing supply of well-qualified Ph.D.s for future geoexploratory work (staff, line and research), can the schools expect to provide this supply of able Ph.D.s merely by expanding the proportion of B.S. and B.A. majors who go on through to the doctorate stage of training? And the answer is definitely "No"—as the situation stands at present. Most A.B. graduates are years short of the preparations in basic science and elementary engineering prerequisite to effective graduate study in the geoexploratory fields (paleontology ex-cepted), and similarly many of the annual crop of B.S. graduates lack adequate training in English; in ancient and modern history; and in the modern principles of labor and public relations. Indeed, several basic problems of undergraduate curricular organization and integration remain to be solved before most recipients of a Bachelor's degree will have that sound and broad educational foundation prerequisite to graduate training on a really effective basis. It is for these reasons that we have continued to experiment with our geological engineering program at Princeton, in an endeavor to provide a pilot-plant demonstration of a suitably broad and flexible undergraduate curriculum. Problem 3 But assuming that the schools can and do get undergraduate curricula set up in proper phase and scale to meet needed enrollment quotas for graduate training, what about the most urgent part of our whole mineral-industry educational problem? What about finding and bringing into mineral-industry training those youngsters of superior ability who are, by potential or known inclination, especially well-qualified for geoexploratory work?