Part of the Introduction is below. Download the entire document to learn more about the culture and innovation at MIT 50 years ago.
In presenting my annual report for 1970-71, I am conscious that it is the last in the series that I will have submitted as President of the Institute.
At the outset it is important to emphasize two enduring propositions: that ours is an institute based on education in science with a primary focus on enlarging the horizons of science; and, second, that we are fundamentally concerned with the development of technology and with its applications to society. Both parts of that statement, the cultivation of science and technology and the sharpening concerns for their application to society, are critical parts of our franchise. It is worth repeating that statement at a time when a broad public concern has arisen about science and its applications and when there is new public concern about the support of higher education generally. The most important reflection growing out of this year is that we at M.I.T., in our own way, and in a way wholly consistent with our purpose, must understand these concerns, must meet them openly, and must seek to answer them. Throughout its history, M.I.T. has shown an exceptional ability to combine constancy of principle and continuity of direction with a willingness to change our educational approach within this framework. We will need this ability now and in the years ahead.
It was to this fundamental of the M.I.T. education that I spoke five years ago:
As the Institute founded by William Barton Rogers proceeds in its second century, we call for a renewal of our historic plan. The elements of this plan draw from the basic fiber, the very character of this institution: our power to act, our foundation in science, our commitment to research, our determination to build the humanities and the arts, our emphasis on the importance of the environment and, above all, our expectations for the performance of our students. These basic propositions make M.I.T. a university that never looks back as a conserver of the past but always forward as a maker of the future.
These last five years have seen us persist on these lines.
My reports in these years have sought to review the significant events of the year, both our accomplishments and our shortcomings. I have thought it was important, also, to stress the need for asking the right questions of the events around us, to maintain a capacity for thinking about the future in spite of the pressure of current events, and to reflect deeply on the alternatives before us. This report follows that outline.
First, on the year itself. It was a good year for M.I.T. Much was accomplished that gives our future a better chance. I do not mean it was a quiet one. There was dynamic effort and interaction. But the Institute was not subjected to the constant threat of confrontation near the surface which had been present in other years, and there was a sense of healthy change and vitality that was good for all of us. Two questions that I raised in last year’s report, the danger of politicizing these institutions and the problems of maintaining an internal and independent discipline system, seemed to have lost their immediacy as pernicious problems. A great deal of reevaluation of our educational process and a stimulation stemming from many sources but principally due to the excellent effort of the M.I.T. Commission produced much useful debate and the outline of new directions.
The record of any university and certainly of our Institute is best expressed in the growth and learning of the people associated with it. In the best of times and in the worst of times, individual students, faculty members, researchers, and employees find their way to learning and performance. One expression of individual attainment is the conferral by M.I.T. of 974 undergraduate degrees and 1,283 graduate degrees, including 400 doctorates, a total of 2,257 in the last year. Accomplishment is also expressed in the awarding to faculty and staff members of major honors including the Nobel Prize and many other distinguished awards, as well as less visible but equally significant forms of recognition. I suppose, too, that accomplishment is noted by the quality of our graduate programs. Once again, the American Council on Education has rated the Institute among the top half-dozen universities of the nation and first in our own category.
New developments in curriculum, about which I will say more later, made excellent headway. Curriculum changes were taking place as the M.I.T. Commission continued the discussion of its first report. The stimulation produced by that report, the formation of a special task force on education, and the continuing experimental efforts by several departments, notably in the School of Science, promise major productive and student-centered programs for the near future. We saw more effort in the public policy area and in various interdisiplinary efforts at both PRESIDENT the graduate and undergraduate levels. We saw the effective beginnings of several new laboratory efforts. The most visible change perhaps was the successful inauguration of a one-month independent activity and study period between the fall and spring terms. The experience surpassed expectations. Let us see if there is equal enthusiasm in the next few years. One new program deserving special note was the planning and building of the Community Fellows Program for leaders of community organizations, to begin in the fall of 1971.In the continuing struggle to maintain financial support for research at M.I.T., we have largely held our own. There were small increases in the level of research on the campus as a whole and in the off-campus laboratories, but inflation made such levels less productive. Support for efforts in new fields in environment and in health sciences and for maintaining important basic areas was difficult to obtain.
The many laboratories at M.I.T. are engaged, consequently, in a struggle of funding good ideas in a spare Federal climate. In an important specific case, I have reported on the Draper Laboratory in the past years, and its progress is described in the report of its Chairman and President. We continue to develop its disengagement from the Institute, conscious of our requirement to keep the Laboratory sound in the process and slowed, I suppose, by the general downtrend in activity in the area of its greatest expertise. We persist, with the leadership of an outstanding board, in our efforts.
A steady erosion of support in some key areas was a worrisome concern. For example, support for graduate students in critical fields across the country is waning. The number of Federal graduate fellowships is about 40 per cent less than it was four years ago, and that number is further declining. While M.I.T. is faring somewhat better than most, we face a serious crisis in the support of able young people who wish to pursue science and engineering at the graduate level.
Other areas are more positive. A review of last year shows that our effort in enrollment of minority students, both graduate and undergraduate, and in minority staff employment continued to make progress. The number of women students has increased by about 10 per cent to over 600. In September, 1970, 91 women entered M.I.T. as members of the freshman class; this year that number will exceed 120, the largest on record.
In recent years the recognition of the full contribution of women within the staff and in the student body has been better appreciated. From the time of Ellen Swallow Richards, a hundred years ago, the place of women has been secure, but increasing numbers more nearly reflect the growing recognition of women's potential and accomplishment. The same can be said of the black students and staff. The contribution made to education and to understanding among different people is great and growing. Let no one doubt the meaning of this growth. An earlier recognition, that of M.I.T. as an international as well as an intensely national institute, is seen from the records of the registrar. I do not know of an institution of the first rank which has as large a proportion of students and staff from outside the country. The relationship of this fact to the ultimate search for the whole brotherhood of man is worth noting, especially in this time of increasing international tension.
The year was marked by the opening of the Frank S. MacGregor House, a dormitory residence housing 324 students, and the completion in 1971 of the remodeling of Burton-Conner, housing 344 students. Construction on a third student residence, Westgate II, which will house approximately 400 graduate students, was begun. Among academic 3 PRESIDENT buildings, the Ralph M. Parsons Laboratory for Water Resources and Hydrodynamics was dedicated. Work on the George R. Wallace, Jr., Astrophysical Observatory was essentially completed, and plans for the formal dedication are tentatively scheduled for this fall. Work was begun on the electrical engineering and electronics buildings, M.I.T.’s largest single building project since the move to Cambridge. On the building front beyond our campus, a major phase of M.I.T.’s housing program in Cambridge, 684 units for the elderly, was approved by the Department of Housing and Urban Development and is the nation’s largest project under the Turnkey Program.
On the fiscal side the Institute finished the year on a break-even basis, once again without incursion on endowment funds. We did so in the face of major inflation and cost pressures, both regular and unexpected in nature. This result was achieved by continued cost-cutting effort; by increased revenues from tuition and endowment income; by near-record gifts, grants, and bequests; by the relentless draw on unrestricted current balances; and by deferment of some needed programs. When one considers the demands during the year on new funds for substantial student aid, the new building construction, and a substantial addition to the endowment capital of the Institute, this financial balancing act is noteworthy. The fund raising efforts of the Institute resulted in a total of 39.6 million dollars in gifts, grants, and bequests, barely exceeded in only one other year in the Institute’s history. Included in this total were the gifts of the largest number of contributing alumni on record. The longer term outlook is not as bright, but it is satisfying to report this result in the atmosphere of general gloom on the collegiate financial scene.Plans were completed during the year to elect representatives of recent classes to the Corporation. In the spring five young trustees were recommended for election to the Corporation, to take office in the coming year.
Finally, a new chapter in the Institute’s history was begun with the election of Jerome B. Wiesner as President and the concurrent election of Paul E. Gray as Chancellor, a new version of a time-honored office at M.I.T. designed to add further depth to the leadership of the Institute. Both appointments became effective on July 1, 1971.
The year ended with a Commencement full of hope, I thought, and full of challenges rightly placed before this institution.
And so another year goes into the record. The events are recorded in detail in the reports of the Schools, departments, and offices of the Institute. What does one discern from these diverse events? Are the pieces reported here isolated parts of the experience of the human beings that make up the long line of history that is M.I.T.? Some undoubtedly are, but others add to a pattern, often begun long before our time and continuing as part of a gradual evolution and probably revolution of the Institute. Let me cite some of the more important patterns as they appear to me.
HOWARD W. JOHNSON