Chapter 8: Materials Science and Engineering: 1972-1988
Part 1. The Period 1972-1982
The Institute
At MIT the availability of funds and too number of graduate students had peaked in 1967-68. The subsequent rapid decline of government spending on research and technology and the widespread disenchantment with science were felt throughout the Institute, but particularly in departments with a strong applied science and research orientation. After the initial contraction in the late 1960s, "research funds and graduate students disappeared at an alarming rate" (Floe, King, and Owen). Even the number of faculty members decreased slightly. 1973, a year of severe economic restraints, was the low point in the Department' 5 funding and student enrollment. Reductions in research expenditures, enrollments, and the size of faculties were national trends. The decline "bottomed out" in 1973.
A dramatic upturn began in 1975 as the economy improved. Energy-related research, in particular, benefited from the oil crisis of 1974, as mentioned earlier. Generaliy, the focus of materials research support moved to the engineering end of the spectrum, especially materials processing and materials design.
The Department
Professor King had resigned as head of the Department as of September 1,1972. He was succeeded by Professor Floe, who served as Acting Head in the academic year 1972-73. In July 1973, Professor Walter Owen assumed charge of the Department.
The President's Report for 1972-73 stated in relation to the Department that the "number of undergraduates [is] too small, some subjects do not attract enough interest, and funding has declined ... some professors are not supported." The Report for the following year reported "small but steady growth." It also pointed out that the Department at MIT would be able to accept larger numbers of highly qualified students than any other materials department in the country. The volume of research was increasing.
A new undergraduate curriculum in materials science was introduced in 1973. In the following year, programs in five areas were offered to graduate students. Also, in 1974 a cooperative program with industry, destined to become exceedingly successful, was started under the leadership of Professor King.
Work on polymers in the Department was strengthened by the transfer of Professor McGarry from the Department of Civil Engineering (letter from Walter S. Owen to Edward J. Hanley, April 16, 1974).
During the 1970s the Department's Visiting Committee, under the chairmanship of Mr. Edward J. Hanley, was very active. The Committee's Report for the October 1973 meeting proposed six changes:
- Eliminating overlaps in subject coverage
- Introducing new subjects in accordance with new needs and interests
- Changing most 12-unit to 8-unit subjects
- Separating laboratories from lecture classes and introducing project-oriented laboratories
- Introducing a foliowup subject for 3.091 Introduction to Solid State Chemistry
- Restructuring subjects in a "first division" and "second division" involving, respectively, fundamentals or having professional orientation
The Visiting Committee Report of November 22, 1974 quoted Professor Owen's Annual Report. In this report, four major problems were outlined:
- The small number of juniors and seniors
- The increasing average age of the faculty and the increase in the ratio of tenured to untenured faculty
- Unsupported research being carried by general Institute funds
- The "failure to date to develop a program of instruction at either the undergraduate or graduate level which interacts strongly with industry." Regarding this matter, Owen's report had pointed out "there are contacts with industry, especially through the Industrial Liaison Program, but no educational programs."
Owen discussed possible solutions to these problems and the foliowing recommendations of a committee chaired by Professor Roy Kaplow:
- A summer program in materials engineering
- A 12-month Master's program for graduates in industry designed to help them reorient their careers
- Research on materials policy and/or materials systems work
- A co-op program
The first two recommendations do not seem to have been pursued. The third recommendation probably gave some support to research projects that were being started at the time. The co-op program was the major result of the Kaplow Committee's work.
Undergraduate Program
A new undergraduate curriculum went into effect in 1972-73. It took a broadened approach to materials. It also introduced greater flexibility, which made transfer from other departments easier. Subject 18.03 Differential Equations was restored as a requirement. This and other changes had been discussed in meetings with the Visiting Committee. Restricted electives permitted some specialization of undergraduates, but the emphasis was on education in the science and engineering fundamentals of materials (Floe, King, and Owen).
The cooperative program, known as Course IIIB, was exceedingly successful from the start under the leadership of Professor King, who was joined in 1978 by Mr. Joseph M. Dhosi, the Department's Administrative Officer. After Professor King's death in 1985, Professor Pelioux became the program's director and Mr. Dhosi continued as coordinator. Enrollment in the program has continued to grow. The President's Report of 1976-77 mentioned that "many of the new students [were] attracted by [it]." After only a few years of its existence, a majority of seniors in the Department were enrolied in Course IIIB.
Graduate Studies
In the early 1970s it was the graduate program that defined the Department's range of interests. One of the first activities involving all parts of the Department in the period 1972-82 was conducted by the Ad Hoc Committee on Doctoral Programs in Materials under Professor Cohen as Chairman. The Committee of ten members submitted its report dated September 25, 1973 in preparation for the Visiting Committee meeting of October 12, 1973.
The opening section of the Committee's report reviewed the state of doctoral studies in the Department, including statistics for the fields of Metaliurgy, Ceramics, and Materials Science for the period 1968-69 to 1972-73. The Department awarded annualiy about 11 percent of all materials-designated doctorates in the United States and about 18 percent of the doctorates in MIT's School of Engineering.
The Committee on Doctoral Programs in Materials made two main recommendations. The first was to broaden the Department's base in the field of materials. The second was to establish doctoral programs in Metaliurgy, Ceramics, Polymerics, Materials Science, Materials Engineering, and Materials Management.
The Committee's report stated that the Department had the resources to offer doctoral programs in these fields with the exception of polymerics and materials management. They proposed that "steps should be taken to offer a doctorate in Polymerics (with Chemical Engineering if this Department is willing)." The Committee commented that a program in materials management was "further off, but planning should be undertaken." As a more general recommendation, the Committee suggested that the doctoral fields should be granted adequate visibility, but they should not be aliowed to develop into isolated subdepartments.
Other subjects considered were the qualifying procedure, basic courses, examinations, the thesis, and oral defense. The Committee recommended that the foreign language requirement be dropped, but that the minor be retained and reviewed.
The report concluded that the suggested plan (1) would establish a sound framework for emergence of a cohesive Department of Materials Science and Engineering and (2) would not stretch out the candidate's time of residence, but would require a larger cornmitment-of faculty effort. The closing statement projected estimates of the-expected increases in the number of doctorates in the Department.
In the "Brief History," Floe, King, and Owen commented: "Since 1974, ali five graduate programs have reached maturity. The most remarkable growth has been in polymers. Materials engineering, perhaps the most innovative and adventurous of the new programs, is firmly established. The program in ceramics and metaliurgy, with origins more than fifty years ago, have found new strengths. Student interest in materials science has remained at a high level, in part because of the ever-increasing importance of electronic, superconducting and optical materials."
Change of Department Name in 1974-75
Professor Walter Owen, the new Department head, in a letter to Dean Alfred H. Keil dated March 19, 1974, pointed out that the most advanced materials disciplines-metallurgy and cerarnicswere being joined by a rapidly developing third discipline, materials science, and that the Department had launched a graduate program in polymerics, which "parallels the programs in metallurgy and ceramics." He added that "it is clear that the trend toward greater emphasis on the development of useful structure-sensitive properties in nonmetallic materials will continue." He ended his letter by reporting that "at the Departmental Faculty Committee meeting on February 6, there emerged a clear consensus of opinion that ... the name of the Department should be changed to the Department of Materials Science and Engineering... "
In a letter dated April 17, 1974 to Mr. Edward J. Hanley, the Chairman of the Visiting Committee, Owen referred to the changes made by the Department, especially with respect to the graduate programs, and pointed out that "the faculty of the Department came to realize that we are now, in fact as well as in principle, a Department concerned with all engineering materials. Consequently, we concluded that we should petition the Institute for permission to change the name of the Department. We would like to be calied the 'Department of Materials Science and Engineering: " He mentioned his "memorandum ... to the Dean, which has received a preliminary scrutiny by both the Engineering Council and the Academic Council. Before proceeding formaliy to ask for the change to be approved by the faculty and Corporation, we would like to have your reaction to the proposal."
Mr. Hanley replied to Professor Owen on April 26, 1974 and enclosed copies of a letter he had written to two associates, one of whom was a member of the Visiting Committee and the other a graduate of the Class of 1953. In this letter, he expressed the "feeling most graduates in metaliurgy will be less than enthusiastic about losing the word 'metallurgy' in the Department name," but that he also felt that "the proposal of 'materials science and engineering' might better cover ali the fields the Department henceforth wili deal in .... " One of Hanley's respondents wrote that" 'materials science and engineering' detracts from the prestige of the School" and that he saw no reason for the change. The other replied that "as a metaliurgist, of course, I am less than enthusiastic about having the word 'metaliurgy' eliminated as the primary Department name:' but that he would "accept the judgments of the Visiting Committee and the Department Head."
In his letter to Owen, Hanley commented: "these replies may not be typical, but they do indicate the reaction to a name change at this time might be somewhat on the violent side. It just may be that it is too soon to consider a name change. Perhaps it might be more favorably regarded if it were delayed a year or two to let the Department really become established to fit the proposed new name."
The most nearly "violent" reaction came in a letter dated May 13, 1974 to President Wiesner from Dr. James C. Fulton, who had obtained the Doctor's degree in metallurgy in 1953 and in 1974 was the president of The Metallurgical Society of AIME. Dr. Fulton argued strongly against the name proposed by the Department. President Wiesner replied on June 19, 1974 that he was aware "that there are conflicting views on the matter of an appropriate name for the Department at this time, due in large part to the fact that many faculty do not feel that the present name is broad enough to reflect the engineering activities-examples are those persons who investigate polymers or ceramics." He noted that "the Department has recommended a name change to the Academic Council, but that group has suggested that there be further discussion before we finally act on the matter .... "
The name change was strongly endorsed in a letter to President Wiesner dated June 11, 1974 by Dr. S.L. Blum, an alumnus in ceramics and, at the time, Chairman of the National Materials Advisory Board. He wrote: "I fully subscribe to this name change because it presents a better description of what the Department is doing."
In a letter to President Wiesner dated November 26,1974, Professor Owen referred to Wiesner's request "at the meeting of the Academic Council ... that I discuss the proposed change with representative alumni and with the Visiting Committee. I have talked with several hundred alumni. A small number (probably less than ten) are strongly opposed to dropping the word metallurgy from the title. The vast majority were in favor of the proposed change, many of them expressing their support in the strongest possible terms." Owen further wrote: "The members of the Visiting Committee ... discussed the matter formally ... and took a vote. The majority were in favor of the proposed change, only one of the members present voting in the negative. One other member. .. wrote a letter opposing the change. A second absent member wrote supporting the change in general, but suggesting a small modification (Sir Alan Cottrell). A third absent member sent a message supporting the change (William O. Baker)." In the same letter to President Wiesner, Owen asked formally that, as of January 1, 1975, the name of the Department be "the Department of Materials Science and Engineering."
The Executive Committee of the Corporation approved the proposed change at its meeting on December 6, 1974. A press release explained the reason for the name change and added that it "represents the tenth alteration in either name or course number in the 110-year evolution of the Department."
Comparison of 1967 and 1974-75 Name Changes
The circumstances and motivations involved in the name changes of 1967 and 1974-75 invite comparison. The earlier name change was largely motivated by the need to increase enrollments by informing prospective students effectively about the work in the Department. There was an element of competition with departments in other institutions that had already changed their names. By contrast, the name change of 1974-75 was advocated because it was believed that materials science and engineering was more descriptive. If the use of the word "engineering" was considered to be an attractive feature, it was not the main consideration.
The opposition to the change in 1967 (and at the time of the first attempts in 1961) came almost entirely from within MIT and was essentially of a competitive nature. By contrast, the opposition in 1975 was based on loyalty to "metallurgy."
Recovery and Expansion
The name change of 1974-75 symbolized the faith of the faculty and the administration in the future of the Department. It demonstrated their conviction that materials science and engineering had an important place in technical education and that MIT's Department had a major role to play in this field. The measures taken during the first years of Professor Owen's tenure as head of the Department included the adoption of the new undergraduate curriculum in materials science in 1973, the reorganization of the five graduate majors in 1974, and the establishment of the cooperative program in 1975. These and other measures, together with an improvement in general economic conditions, resulted in a remarkable upturn in the Department's fortunes.
Statistics reported by Floe, King, and Owen indicate significant trends. In 1974 there had been only 37 students at the undergraduate level. By the Fall of 1981 their number had risen to 146, the highest point reached up to that time in the entire history of the Department. The reported percentage increase from 1974 to 1980 was 272 percent. In the same period the increase in the number of graduate students was 70 percent.
Professor Owen in the Department's Report to the President for the academic year 1981-82 wrote: "The number of undergraduate students registered in Courses III, lIIA and IIIB was 144, 40.0 percent of whom were women. Seventy-nine of these students, nearly half of our undergraduate population, elected Course IIIB, the Department's Co-operative Work-Study Program. These students were placed in 28 different companies representing a broad cross-section of industry."
The report for 1981-82 gave the number of students registered in the Department's graduate programs as 233, an all-time high. The report stated that "compared with the situation in the undergraduate program, a smaller proportion of the graduate students were women."
The number of faculty members increased from 26 to 36 between the academic years 1972-73 and 1980-81. The appointments strengthened the newer subject areas. When Professor Owen left the position of Department head in 1982, great progress had been made toward establishing a balance between different specializations, particularly with respect to the different classes of materials.