University of Virginia Library

"Soundings"

Dean Younger Discusses Graduate School Role

By John Casteen

This is the first half of a two-part
interview with Dean Edward
Younger. The second part, dealing
with master's degree programs and
the University's efforts to provide
high quality education for
personnel to staff Virginia's rapidly
growing system of community
colleges, will appear in next
Friday's Cavalier Daily.

We have been interested for the
last several years in the rapid
growth of the University's graduate
schools, and in the question of
what effect this growth is having on
the University community. So we
were pleased to be able to talk one
day last week with Dean Edward
Younger of the Graduate School of
Arts and Sciences. Dean Younger
agreed to describe for us some of
the changes that have occurred in
graduate training here and to
evaluate the University's position in
graduate education.

Our first topic was the
condition of the graduate school in
general its strengths and
weaknesses. "To begin with," Dean
Younger told us, "the state of the
graduate school is good, and the
future is highly promising. We have
been able to build a much stronger
faculty than we used to have, and
we are attracting more and better
qualified graduate students than
ever before." We asked him what
the University does to improve its
faculty. "That job is done in two
ways. The Center of Advanced
Studies, which was first to set up as
a $3,780,000 National Science
Foundation project in the sciences,
has been expanded to include
several departments in the liberal
arts. The idea behind the Center is
to create a working community of
top scholars in several fields. So far,
the Center is doing exactly that. It
offers superior research
opportunities to superior scholars,
and it provides a bank of talent for
graduate teaching. The Center is in
reality being used as a recruiting
device for superior faculty. Once
brought here to the Center, the
scholar is likely to become a
permanent faculty member. That's
one way. The other way is through
supporting funds appropriated by
the Virginia General Assembly to
help us attract eminent scholars to
the faculty. This money, when
matched by University endowment
funds, helps us attract first-rate
men throughout the University, not
just in departments included in the
Center. Together, the eminent
scholars program and the Center for
Advanced Studies have served to
stimulate growth and improvement
throughout the faculty, even in
areas not touched directly by the
programs."

Professor Selection

We asked how the University
selects professors to be included in
these advanced programs. "We look
for somebody whose reputation is
already made or who shows strong
indications that he will become a
leading man in his field," explained
Dean Younger. We asked whether
this hiring method might not tend
to staff the graduate programs with
famous but elderly men. "No, we
have ways to prevent that. We look
for reasonably young men, in their
early to mid-forties, who have
already distinguished themselves, but
who have before them several
useful years before they reach the
climax of their careers. The
University has a lot to offer a good
scholar, but it expects to benefit
for several years from its
investment in him."

Showing us some statistical
tables concerning faculty salaries in
major universities, Dean Younger
explained that one good effect of
this emphasis on quality has been
that salaries throughout the
University are up. "We have, you
might say, an 'A' rating. The
University scored A in salaries in all
three ranks(professor, associate
professor, and assistant professor)
in the American Association of
University Professors ratings for
this year. This 'A' rating works to
our advantage in that it attracts
applications from the best men in
all ranks.

"Another part of upgrading the
graduate school," he went on, "has
been departmental development.
Our departments have been
benefiting from these faculty
enrichment programs until, at this
time, six or more of them are
among the best in the country." We
asked how one judges a
department's quality, and Dean
Younger answered that "the best
standard to judge by is the
department's faculty and its
prestige, in combination with the
calibre of student that the
department attracts and its Ph.D
production."

Ph.D. Production

The matter of Ph.D. production
interested us because it has been so
much in the news recently. We
interrupted to ask the Dean to
explain it. "We, educators and
administrators, have come to realize
that Ph.D. production is extremely
important. For one thing, high
production is almost a must to
attract outside fellowship
assistance, and especially to attract
Federal support. In one sense, you
can judge the graduate school by its
production of graduate degrees. I
am speaking now, of course, of
good graduate degrees. The Ph.D.'s
who go out from the University to
work in other colleges and
universities, or to enter the
professions, help to establish our
reputation. We need to produce
large numbers of Ph.D.'s for several
reasons, but they have to be good."

Dean Younger showed us a
chart listing Ph.D. production since
the second world war. "You see
that we produce 42 Ph.d.'s in all
departments of the Graduate
School of Arts and Sciences in
1962-1963, while we produced 90
in 1967-1968. That's more than
double the output in only five
years, and all of the graduate
divisions together produced 147
Ph.D.'s in 1967-1968, which is a
new record for total production.
When you combine the increase in
numbers with the improvement in
quality that our current faculty
represents, you can see just how
dramatically the University is
moving ahead in this area."

We asked whether it is possible
for a very good department to
produce only a few Ph.D.'s, while
remaining a good department.
"Yes, I think so," Dean Younger
replied, "and our Mathematics
Department would perhaps be an
example of a first-rate department
with great national prestige but
relatively low Ph.D. production,
although the Math Department has
rapidly accelerated its Ph.D.
production within the past few
years. But this is the exception
rather than the rule. In general, and
noting such exceptions as the Math
Department, you can expect the
best departments to have high
production. We have recognized
that fact here, and it is pretty well
accepted throughout the U.S.A."

We noticed in the chart that
total production fluctuated from
year to year, and we asked about
that. "Those fluctuations are
important," Dean Younger told us,
"because they illustrate another
point about the nature of graduate
education. A department has to
build up a large backlog of Ph.D.
candidates if it is to have
consistently good production.
Those fluctuations reflect years in
which the backlog was for some
reason wiped out. This has been a
concern to us for some time, and
we have tried to control the
backlog by offering first-rate
faculty and strong financial support
to our students.

Financial Support

"The real point here is that
good financial support-good
fellowships that students can
depend on—is absolutely
indispensable to a strong graduate
program. Up until a few years ago,
we had trouble providing good
enough support except in the
sciences." He showed us the
department breakdowns on the
chart. "The sciences have always
done well. They get the money, set
up strong, clearly defined programs,
and produce the Ph.D.'s. It is only
in fairly recent years," and he
pointed to a different place on the
chart, "that the humanities could
keep up. Our five-year increase
from 42 to 90 is one indication of
the University's over-all
improvement in graduate
education."