October 3-4, 1974

Governing Board of the American Institute of Physics

Minutes of Meeting

The Governing Board meeting was held in two parts. The first session took place in the Madison Room of the Roosevelt Hotel, New York City, on Thursday evening October 3, 1974, and lasted until 9:35 p.m. The second session was held at the offices of the Institute on Friday, October 4, 1974, beginning at 9:00 a.m.

Members Present During All or Part of the Meeting: H. Richard Crane – Chairman, Robert T. Beyer, John V. Bouyoucos, Joseph A. Burton, James L. Flanagan, Kenneth W. Ford, William A. Fowler, Laurence W. Fredrick, James B. Gerhart, Martin Greenspan, W. W. Haven. Jr., Sherwood K. Haynes , Gerald Holton, G. A. Jeffrey, E. Leonard Jossem, H. William Koch, James A. Krumhansl, John S. Laughlin, A. I. Mahan, Sidney Millman, Philip M. Morse, E. R. Piore, Jarus W. Quinn, R. S. Rivlin, F. Dow Smith, A. A. Strassenburg

Absent: J. E. Goldman, Janet B. Guernsey, Robert P. Kraft, A. B. Rosenfeld, A. L. Schawlow, Frederick Seitz

Guests: Mary L. Shoaf and Thomas Neff of the American Physical Society were present at both sessions, and Edward L. Brady of the National Bureau of Standards attended the morning part of the October 4 session only.

AIP Staff: H. William Koch, Director; Sidney Millman, Acting Secretary; G. F. Gilbert, Treasurer; Lewis Slack, Associate Director for General Activities; Robert H. Marks, Associate Director for Publishing; Dorothy M. Lasky, Assistant to the Director; Mary M. Johnson, Assistant to the Acting Secretary;

Chairman Crane convoked the evening session on October 3 at 7:45 p.m. and introduced Mary L. Shoaf and Thomas Neff who had been invited to attend the meeting.

1. Minutes

Upon motion made and passed without dissent, the minutes of the March 22-23, 1974, Governing Board meeting were approved as distributed.

2. Replacement by Martin Greenspan of Wallace Waterfall on the Governing Board

Millman reported that an official communication from the Acoustical Society had been received designating Martin Greenspan as a new member of the Governing Board to fill the unexpired term of Wallace Waterfall who died on August 21, 1974.

  1. Election of Robert Beyer as Executive Committee Member to Replace Wallace Waterfall

    Havens reported that the recommendation of the 1974 Nominating Committee is for Robert T. Beyer to replace Wallace Waterfall as a member of the AIP Executive Committee for the current year. This led to the passing of the following motion:

    MOVED that Robert T. Beyer be elected to replace Wallace Waterfall as a member of the Executive Committee for the remainder of its current term ending with the Governing Board meeting in March 1975.

3. Responses from Societies to Report of the Long–Range Planning Committee

Crane opened the discussion on this item by reading his eight-page report entitled "Comments Stimulated by the Report of the Long-Range Planning Committee," copy attached as Exhibit A. He reminded the Board that at the previous meeting of the Board of Governors he was directed to ask the Presidents of each of the AIP Member Societies for comments on the report of the Long-Range Planning Committee.

The rather lengthy discussions that followed Crane's presentation were carried on in part on the evening of October 3 and resumed in the morning of October 4 after items 4, 5, 6, and 7 were disposed of. For clarity in presentation all appropriate discussions and resulting actions on Item 3 will be recorded consecutively.

Picking up on Crane's reporting that the current prevailing sentiments are for greater emphasis on direct services by AIP to the Member Societies and the curtailment of AIP programs which reach outward to the community, Piore expressed keen disappointment with the modest scope allowed in the current plans for the History of Physics program. Referring to the offer letter to Dr. Spencer Weart as the new Director of this program, he thought that it unduly emphasized the "maintenance" aspects of the program, such as the collection of taped oral interviews and the making available of the Niels Bohr Library to visiting scholars, rather than giving the Director a free hand to conduct also a certain amount of scholarly research in the history of physics. The Director must have freedom to innovate. He raised the question whether such a description of the functions of the Director can attract a first rate person. Havens and Morse pointed out that the AIP could not currently afford the type of program envisaged by Piore. Piore believed that it is possible to get the additional outside support provided the Board does not tie the new Director's hands. After further comments by Rivlin and Holton, Koch informed the Board that Dr. Spencer Weart was selected by the Search Committee as a highly qualified candidate that he was happy to accept the offer which described formally the duties of the Director and priorities to be followed by him and that he will be joining the AIP staff in about the middle of November.

The topic that was next discussed was whether AIP should look only to its Member Societies or more broadly represent people interested in physics but who are not members of any of the AIP member Societies. Smith and Holton felt that we have some opportunities here as well as some responsibility to that community. Havens and Rivlin on the other hand expressed the strong feeling that AIP should serve only the Member Societies. Others interested in physics should first form some society and then look for representation in AIP. The sentiment of the Board was that Crane’s report accurately reflected the divergent beliefs on this subject.

The matter of governance and mode of operation of AIP came up next by a discussion of the committee structure. Burton noted that this subject was cited in a number of responses to the LRPC report. The Executive Committee has already made a number of changes in response to these suggestions, such as meeting more frequently and inviting to these meetings a representative from every Society that does not have a member on the Executive Committee, as a non-voting participant. He also referred to the documents on "Present Committees and Reporting Channels" and "Proposed Committees and Reporting Channel," copies attached as Exhibit B. The intent of this sample of a possible structure is to have six major committees of the Governing Board that have responsibilities for major areas of Institute activities. It also provides strong representation by Governing Board members. He reported that at its meeting on October 3, the Executive Committee decided to recommend to the Governing Board that an ad hoc Committee on Committees be appointed in order to study this important subject more leisurely and in some depth. This discussion led to the passing of the following motion:

MOVED that a committee to re-examine the AIP committee structure using the documents submitted as Exhibit B as a guide be appointed.

Further discussions on the Crane report brought out the strong enthusiasm of the Board members for the Chairman's comments on the Member Societies' responses to the LRPC report and led to the passing of the following motion:

MOVED that we commend Chairman Richard Crane for the report presented to the Board of Governors on October 3 and incorporate it into the minutes of this meeting and that, consistent with the Member Societies' views there presented, the Board direct AIP management to give top priority to the solution of service problems.

Keeping in mind the last sentence of the motion just passed, Koch commented that in the subscription fulfillment area we have benefitted very much from the work of the committee that A. A. Strassenburg chairs. He wondered whether this motion would be even more properly implemented if had a similar committee on other service problems. Havens felt that the Strassenburg committee is familiar with those problems and therefore suggested that the committee’s charge could be enlarged. This resulted in the passing of the following motion:

MOVED that the charter of the present committee appointed by the Chairman of the Governing Board to supervise subscription fulfillment operations of the AIP be enlarged, and if desirable the membership be also enlarged, to identify the service areas which should be given first priority by AIP management.

The matter of future long-range planning activities was also briefly discussed. The Board was in agreement with Crane's observation in his report that we were perhaps not "in any condition to conduct a long-range planning study when we were so up-tight about immediate service problems." It was decided that this topic best be left to the Committee on Committees.

4. Recommendations from Assembly

Rivlin, who was this year's Secretary for the meeting (Assembly of Society Officers), reported that the Assembly in the afternoon made two recommendations: (1) That the Assembly be continued as an identifiable entity, and (2) That the Governing Board extend to Society officers invitations to attend Board meetings as non-voting participants. Crane reminded the Board that the Assembly is an independent organization and that it does not exist at the pleasure of this Board. Fowler wondered whether it wouldn’t be better if we had a joint meeting of the Assembly and the Board of Governors. Further comments along these lines resulted in the passing of the following motion:

MOVED that the Governing Board extend to Society officers invitations to attend Board meetings as non-voting participants.

The October 3 session of the Governing Board meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m., and the October 4 session was called to order at 9:00 a.m.

5. Report on Computerized Publishing

Marks presented a review of the computerized activities in the Publications Branch of AIP. This was a slightly condensed version of his presentation to the Executive Committee on September 9 and which was already reported in the minutes of that meeting (see Item 2, Page 3 of September 9, 1974, Executive Committee meeting minutes). In answer to a question from Haynes, he noted that we have not included Physics Today and The Physics Teacher in the computerized article heads, although we probably could. We do The Journal of Vacuum Science and Technology, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, Medical Physics, the translation journals, Applied Physics Letters, Journal of Applied Physics, Journal of Mathematical Physics, The Physics of Fluids — all except the American Journal of Physics, which has a very special design. We estimated this year it would cost about 20-25% more than typewriter composition if we had only a single use for this product and we have come in under that for the first six–months’ period. An important advantage of computerized heads is that many output products are made possible with this program. For example, the income from Nuclear Science Abstracts is used to off-set part of the cost.

6. Brady–Hookway Report on AIP–IEE Negotiations

Crane introduced the subject by noting that the June 22, 1973, proposed agreement between The Institution of Electrical Engineers (IEE) and AIP, which had subsequently been cancelled, included the following provisions in the production of computer-type input of abstracts from AIP to IEE for inclusion in the IEE Journal called Physics Abstracts:

  1. Acceptance of IEE as the principal world secondary service in physics.
  2. Recognition of AIP's copyright to its author–prepared abstracts.
  3. Establishment of a User Advisory Committee.

Cancellation of this agreement has left a hiatus in our relations that was discussed with the Board at its March 22, 1974, meeting. At that meeting the Board passed the following resolution: "Informal discussions as proposed in the F. K. Willenbrock letter to L. Burchinal dated January 30, 1974 (copy attached as Exhibit C), that will lead to a reopening of IEE–AIP negotiations are hereby encouraged. The Board will look to the development of recommendations for AIP action regarding those negotiations from an ad hoc committee consisting of Dr. E. Brady, Chairman, Dr. H. Richard Crane, and Dr. H. I. Fusfeld, based on the exploratory Brady discussions proposed by Willenbrock." The informal discussions have been initiated involving Dr. Harry Hookway, Chairman of the National Library Board of the United Kingdom, and Dr. Edward Brady, Associate Director for Information Programs at the National Bureau of Standards in Washington, D. C. We were fortunate to have had Dr. Brady with us during the morning session to describe the status and progress of the discussions.

Brady explained that the Hookway–Brady report is not yet available since Hookway is still working on it. They considered that their purpose was to conduct an independent review of the situation as people who are objective and have no personal interest. Their objectives were (a) to suggest some sort of basis for resuming negotiations, and (b) suggest the basis for a long–time relationship between AIP and IEE to the mutual advantage of both organizations and the communities they represent. They did not set out to recommend the structure and details of mechanisms one might suggest. Each of them had individual discussions with appropriate people in their own countries prior to undertaking the mission. Each then visited the activities in the other's country. It was their unanimous opinion that an effective English language version was essential to the health of the world physics community. INSPEC is the basic organization to provide those services. Communication has not been good in the past and must be improved. AIP and its members represent the largest and strongest physics community in the world and must not be ignored.

They recommend that these two organizations recognize two basic principles: (1) There should be an explicit recognition of the need for guidance of INSPEC Physics Abstracts and all of the secondary services by the users and better input; (2) Recognition of INSPEC as the principal service in physics providing secondary services. There should also be recognition of the proprietary rights of the primary publisher in the material that he publishes including the abstract. This does not necessarily mean that he should be paid for use of the abstract but some kind of exchange would be in order to make the situation equitable.

They recommend the establishment of an advisory council consisting primarily of members of the American and British communities and also including representatives of the world physics community at large. It would review programs of the two institutions and make recommendations to their governing bodies and the world community at large. They also recommend coordination between the two organizations at the working level; membership of an appropriate individual from AIP on the INSPEC operating board and vice versa. They recommend that INSPEC be given first option on any new ideas that are proposed. If they do not want it, then they should cooperate if AIP decides to go ahead with it. They recommend a continuing mechanism for communication between the IEE council and the AIP Governing Board, although it need not be formal. Operations of the governing councils are quite different in the two organizations. Many of the policy decisions in IEE are left to George Gainsborough. They will admonish the governing bodies to make sure they have control over the operating people.

In answer to a question, Brady also stated that negotiations which would be satisfactory to all sides should be undertaken for the various users of abstracts. The owners of the abstracts would not necessarily receive money but their views and wishes would be taken into account. He indicated that there would be no problem in making financial arrangements for acquisition of the AIP tape.

Crane added that one advantage of control is to insure that the republishers of abstracts write them exactly as the authors wrote them. Doing it officially might give us this control. Koch cited as an example that many of the tape services do not contain those errata which we register. We want to encourage them to do this. Brady agreed and noted that the British claimed to be quite upset about the number of errors in their reproduction of AIP abstracts.

Fowler stated that we should do everything we can to encourage the free flow of our abstracts but we should not try to make money out of it. Beyer suggested that we should not charge less than the incremental cost of providing the tapes but should not ask for more than what they say they can do it for themselves. Havens agreed that we should not sell abstracts to the British at less than the incremental cost to supply them. Crane concluded the discussion by noting that any proposed agreement will have to be approved by the Executive Committee.

7. AIP TV Film Involvements

  1. Progress Report on Existing Films

    Slack's brief report on this topic was substantially the same as the one he gave on October 3 to the Executive Committee and is reported under Item 3a on Page 3 of the minutes of that meeting. He added that, at the present time, we are not contemplating any further films. Any profits turned over to us by Time-Life by way of royalties will be used to defray reasonable costs; the excess will be turned over to NSF for three years beyond the end of the grant. After that, we can keep it.

  2. Proposal for Short TV Physics News Clips

    Slack expressed the desirability of further coupling with television. He stated that NSF has sponsored some very nice 5-minute news clips but feels that five minutes is a difficult quantum to work with. He said that Kenneth Goldstein of Columbia University has had experience producing 2-minute TV film clips dealing with a single topic, often a news item. This seemed to be a very attractive way of coupling to television. We do have good contact with the media but we have not pursued the production. Havens remarked that you have to design them so that they can be cut — some uses will be shorter than two minutes.

    Hynes noted that the Joint APS–AAPT Committee on Science Education for the General Public is also working on this sort of thing. Mary Shoaf, Chairperson of this Committee, added that one such film has been produced by Professor Sallie Watkins of Southern Colorado State College. One can use the state educational networks to put it on.

    Holton observed that two organizations, AAAS and Science Service, are now concerning themselves with this. How does one get good things fed to commercial TV and radio stations? What are the incentives? Every three years every station has to apply to the Federal Communications Commission for renewal of license and attach an "ascertainment" of community needs. The code is good but enforcement is poor. Leaders of professions must make themselves known to the TV stations. We should ask them to show us their logs, their ascertainment surveys, etc. We must also help them get good material to use. Holton will be glad to provide the names of the people to contact. Fowler expressed the opinion that this is a very constructive suggestion and hopes that the officers here plan to take it up.

8. Wallace Waterfall Memorial Resolution

Hillman read the following proposed memorial resolution as a tribute to the esteemed AIP Secretary Emeritus, Wallace Waterfall, who died on August 21, 1974:

RESOLVED, that in the death of Wallace Waterfall, Secretary Emeritus of the Institute since March 31, 1974, whose service to the Institute and membership on this Board span a period of nearly four decades, this Board has sustained the loss of a member who has been forthright, prudent, faithful, considerate and dedicated in every action, and whose death will be felt as a personal bereavement by each of his associates.

RESOLVED, that as a memorial of the affectionate esteem in which Mr. Waterfall was held, these resolutions be entered on the minutes of the Board and be communicated by the Secretary to his son, Mr. Wallace K. Waterfall.

A motion to adopt the above resolutions was passed unanimously.

9. Report of Committee to Select Compton Medalist

A memo to the Governing Board dated October 3, 1974, from the Nominating Committee to Select the Compton Medalist was distributed. The unanimous recommendation by the committee to award the Compton Medal to Samuel A. Goudsmit was approved by passing the following motion:

MOVED that the Board approve the nomination of Samuel A. Goudsmit to receive the Compton Award.

The session adjourned for luncheon at 12:05 p.m. and reconvened at 1:10 p.m.

10. 6-Year Manpower Program

Slack called attention to the large red book on this subject which had been distributed prior to the meeting and pointed out that this book was put together in response to a request by Quinn for a six-year program and to the general sentiment that the Board be more closely coupled with the general activities of the Institute. Making use of a display of charts, he painted out that the present Manpower Program is carried out by a staff of twelve people under R. W. Sears. The total budget for 1974 is $282,000 with a net cost to AIP of $183,000. A major part of the difference is obtained from direct APS funding. The document which was distributed is a draft of a report to the AIP committee advisory to the Manpower Division. The committee, which includes five members of this Board, will be meeting next month.

Slack noted that there are two basic parts of the Manpower Division's activities, placement and statistical. In the area of placement activities, the various components need to be better integrated. In the statistical activities we hope we can develop a better system for collecting, storing, analyzing and disseminating data. These are of interest to individual students seeking career information, to physicists interested in salary trends, and to industrial as well as academic employers. AIP Member Society officers, including those of APS divisions, and others have asked for a good bit of data. There are also continuing requests from academic institutions for data about minorities.

He called attention to two documents entitled "Cost Estimates AIP Manpower Programs 1967-1980", copies attached as Exhibit C, and said that it would be presumptuous to assume that a large contribution from APS will continue to be forthcoming.

Turning to financial support for this program, he noted that for many years the Register was supported by NSF. The Register now does make possible the reporting of data by subfields. There is a dearth of data on high school physics enrollments. There have been few time-sequence studies and we have incorporated in the 1975 budget some increase in allocation for the purpose of doing better in this regard. We have very little data on the utilization of physicists in industry.

He mentioned some areas where savings could be effected. Some data may lend themselves to sampling techniques. We could achieve savings by making greater use of in-house computer facilities. The figures presented in these charts tend to be conservative. He also observed that the problem of funding Manpower activities is part of the larger problem of funding all of the AIP General Activities. How they are supported and to what level they are supported are questions for this Board.

Piore observed that the programs initiated a few years ago were strongly motivated by the worsening employment situation and the general belief that we had to do something. What are we currently trying to do and how do you measure success? Do we still need this activity?

Slack replied that we have a continuing registration in the Placement Service of about 1,000 but do not have any data on how many people got their jobs through our efforts. There is a steady return to the Placement Service by the smaller colleges. We also keep in fairly close touch with the American Chemical Society. The Institute's program and the data it collects are generally used as models for others to emulate. Strassenburg added his own belief that the Placement Service has always ranked very high with physics departments.

Burton expressed concern about the large sum of money that seems to be required for the Register in future years. Holton agreed that there is no question we cannot undertake this ourselves if it goes to half a million dollars. It is the Government that should be paying for this. AIP should make the best possible case for NSF to do it.

Koch's concluding remark was that he was pleased with the very valuable input received from the Board which will be helpful to the advisory committee. No specific action is asked for at this time.

11. Board Committee Reports

  1. Fiscal Policy Committee Report on Quoted Prices

    Burton distributed copies of a report on the Fiscal Policy Committee meeting of October 2, 1974, and noted that the Executive Committee yesterday recommended that the Governing Board adopt the following resolution as requested by the Fiscal Policy Committee:

    RESOLVED: That the Institute use "Quoted Prices" as the basis for closing its 1974 books, for the 1974 year-end financial statements, and for quarterly statements thereafter, and that the difference between "Quoted Prices" and actual costs for the year ending 31 December 1974, and for each year thereafter, be settled with each Society as soon as it is determined.

    By motion made and passed, the above resolution was adopted.

  2. Advisory Committee on Subscription Fulfillment Report

    Copies of the Committee's report dated October 3, 1914, were distributed and a copy is attached as Exhibit D. Strassenburg reminded the Board that Von Simson was hired early in the year as a consultant and made recommendations for changes in subscription fulfillment operations. These resulted in good changes and a lot more confidence in the system. Since then this committee has been studying the Von Simson report and following the progress here at AIP. One of the most important changes is that costs have been reduced. The budget for this year was reduced by about $120,000 as a result of changes already made, mostly by reduction in temporary staff. A number of recommendations in the report are still under study.

    Von Simson was invited back earlier this week for two days to look over the situation again and the committee will study his second report when it is received. It is the opinion of the committee that some of the residual problems are inevitable. The one area where the problems are severe and costs are high is in the area of agency orders for non-member subscriptions.

    The computer hardware situation was, at one time, regarded as one of the most serious problems. Von Simson did not think that it was that bad. It seems to be working reasonably well now. The current contract will run out a year and a half from now and a decision will have to be made soon about replacing the equipment.

    AIP has recently acquired an optical scanner which has speeded up operations considerably for processing membership dues and subscriptions. The committee will continue to watch the progress in subscription fulfillment and the AIP staff to look for ways to reduce costs.

    Gilbert added that AIP is working on methods to alleviate the agency order problems. We could try to get the subscribers to go on a mid-year expire to alleviate the peaking problem. We are working on a deal now with Faxon, the largest agency, for computer-readable data on renewals. We might offer a discount for early orders. We can also take another look at our policy of not accepting multiple year subscriptions.

12. Election of Sidney Millman as Secretary of AIP

Havens reported that the 1974 Nominating Committee recommended that the status of Sidney Millman be changed from Acting Secretary to Secretary. If he is elected he will no longer have any responsibility to APS. Whereupon the following motion was passed:

MOVED that Sidney Millman be elected Secretary of AIP.

13. Appointment of 1975 Nominating Committee

Crane remarked that we might be open to criticism that our method of appointing nominating committees allows an "in" group to retain control. Holton agreed that the thing to do is to take care of this before it becomes a cause célèbre. He suggested that this newly–formed Committee on Committees consider that. Havens thought that for 1975 the Chairman should appoint the nominating committee as planned. Crane then announced that Robert T. Beyer (chairman), Kenneth W. Ford, and Philip M. Morse will constitute the 1975 Nominating Committee. He also noted that by next March he will have served a five-year term as Chairman of the Board and thought that a change is good for both sides and, although he is not resigning, he would urge the 1975 Nominating Committee to look at other possibilities for Chairman.

The meeting was adjourned at 3:00 p.m.