GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 73 

March 1950 

TRAINING GEOLOGISTS: 

A UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

VIEWPOINT 

By 

Harold M. Bannerman, Assistant Chief Geologist, and 

William T. Pecora, Chairman, Civil Service 

Committee of Expert Examiners in Geology 
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Oscar L. Chapman, Secretary 

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

W. E. Wrather, Director 

WASHINGTON. D. C. 

Free on application to the Director, Geological Survey, Washington 25, D .. C. 
TRAINING GEOLOGISTS 

A UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

VIEWPOINT 

By 

Harold M. Bannerman, Assistant Chief Geologist, and 

William T. Pecora, Chairman, Civil Service 

Committee of Expert Examiners in Geology 
PREFACE 

Each year the Geological Survey receives numerous inqmrtes bearing on the question of 

what constitutes adequate university training for students who desire a career in geology. In 

the absence of any documented summary of Geological Survey views on this subject, and at the 

invitation of the American Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers to contribute a paper 

to its recent symposium on "Training Geologists," H. M. Bannerman and W. T. Pecora prepared 

a review of the training problem as it affects the· Geological Survey. Their original paper, 

delivered as an address before the Institute in New York City, February 12,1950, and reproduced 

here with slight modification as a Geological Survey circular, represents views widely held by 

geologists of the Survey as a result of many years of professional experience. 

Director 
TRAINING GEOLOGISTS 

INTRODUCTION 

This paper is restricted to a consideration of the requirements deemed essential to a career as a geologist in the 

United States Geological Survey. As such, 

it is only incidentally concerned with 

many of the broad aspects of geology in 

education that of necessity must be taken 

into account by the universities and colleges in framing educational curricula. 

Moreover, the paper makes no attempt to 

indicate curricula or to outline the courses 

that should be followed in training geologists, though it undertakes to examine a 

number of the academic and personal features of the problem insofar as they relate 

to the responsibilities and activities of 

the Geological Survey. 

RESPONSIBILITIES AND ACTIVITIES 

OF THE SURVEY 

The Survey is primarily a factfinding and research organization, and its 

history has been peculiarly one of public 

service. Currently it is charged by the 

Congress with such duties as the classification of the public land; the preparation 

of adequate topographic and geologic maps 

of the United States, Alaska, and insular 

possessions; the study of the geologic 

structure and the appraisal of the mineral 

and water resources of the national domain; and the administration of Federal 

mineral leasing laws; and under the 

"Stockpiling Act," it is directed to make 

scientific and economic studies of the 

extent and mode of occurrance of ores and 

minerals and to conduct explorations for 

those that are known to be in short supply 

but which are essential to the security 

and industrial development of the United 

States. 

It is obvious, therefore, that to disc barge the functions inherent in these 

responsibilities the Survey must employ 

personnel.schooled in most, if not all, of 

the technical skills known to the geological sciences. We also have to employ 

geophysicists, geochemists, mathematicians, physicists, chemists, engineers, 

oceanographers, and botanists. 

Currently there are about 900 professional geologists on the staff, of whom 

some 236 are part-time employees! Rough~ 

ly they are engaged as follows: 

About five percent are involv~d in 

high-level planning, in administrative and 

broad supervisory duties, and in editing 

or otherwise preparing maps and reports 

for publication. 

Ten percent are engaged essentially.. 

in various researches in mineralogy, petrology, and paleontology, though a part 

of the effort of this group is devoted to 

identifications for, and consultation with, 

the geologists in the field service. 

Seventeen percent are engaged in 

ground-water studies, largely in cooperation with State agencies. 

Thirty percent are directly concerned 

with investigations of metallic and nonmetallic mineral deposits in the United 

States and Alaska. 

Sixteen percent are engaged in the 

investigation of fuels (coal, oil, and gas) 

in the United States and Alaska. 

Nine percent are engaged in military 

geology. A major part of this activity has 

to do with the study of permafrost in 

1 
2 TRAINING GEOLOGISTS 

Alaska and with general geologic investigations in the islands of the western 

Pacific. 

Five percent are involved in engineering and general geologic studies, 

primarily with reference to the Federal 

Government's construction and riverbasin development programs. 

Four percent are conducting regional 

studies aimed primarily at the solution of 

general geologic problems. 

Two percent carry on conservational 

and appraisal studies in connection with 

the administration of the public-land 

laws. 

Two percent are engaged in minerals 

investigations in foreign areas under the 

auspices of the Department of State and 

the Economic Cooperation Administration. 

From this very generalized summation it is obvious that the greater part of 

the geological work of the Survey is aimed 

at definite. economic objectives •. This is, 

of course, in acc·ordance with the main 

purpose and intent of the Congress in 

appropriating funds to the Survey. However, the program is not primarily one of 

applied geology; instead, it is mainly concerned with work that is more properly 

termed background or objective research. 

By far the greater part of it has to do with 

such activities as regional geologic 

mapping and broad stratigraphic and structural studies of entire mining districts, of 

fuels provinces, or of areas that are believed to hold promise for the discovery 

of minerals or fuels; research aimed at 

developing or refining techniques that 

may prove useful in the search for minerals resources; and investigations designed to provide the background data 

needed for planning and executing the 

enormous programs of river-basin development that are under way or are being contemplated by the Federal · Government. 

Each unit in the organization is involved 

in large measure with background research 

peculiar to its own particular field of 

activity. In addition, most of the units 

carry on some research of more basic· and 

fundamental nature. This pattern is in 

keeping with the traditions of the Survey 

in that, despite the enormous amount of 

energy that has had to be expended to 

meet the day-by-day demands for general 

services, the Survey has always emphasized the research aspects of its job. 

EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND 

Nearly all · the geologists of the 

Survey have permanent Civil Service status. This means that they have been recruited from a register of eligibles 

established by the Civil Service Commission on the basis of competitive examinations of one kind or another. The 

minimum educational requirements for 

men and women entering the service in a 

professional capacity are 30 semester 

hours of geology or an alternative of 24 

semester hours in fundamental geology 

courses with 6 hours in advanced courses 

in related sciences. 

We will not presume to advise students or universities as to what curriculum 

of studies should be followed to qualify 

for appointment or to insure a fully pro_-

ductive career in the Geological Surv.ey, 

for it is doubtful if we would find agreement even among ourselves as to the 

specific course patterns best suited to 

the purpose. Moreover, the records show 

that· the more successful men in the Survey have followed various paths of education. A few generalizations as to basic 

requirements and personal attributes seem 

justified, however, and may prove helpful. 

It has become increasingly evident 

that undergraduate training alone is rarely 

adequate for a satisfac~ory career with 

the United States Geological Survey, even 

though it may suffice to pass· the Civil 

Service examination. Only the unusual 

4-year~ student can compete favorably in 

Survey professional circles with those 
TECHNICAL DISCIPLINES 3 

who have had the advantages of postgraduate training. The Survey does not require a doctorat~, nor do the records 

indicate that the Ph.D. is .necessary to a 

successful career with the Survey; yet 

the intellectual discipline, the int~nsive 

training, and the research habits instilled 

by the graduate-school environment are 

of paramount importance to a Survey geologist. We recommend, therefore, that 

college seniors aiming at a career in the 

Survey plan tQ devote at least 2 years to 

postgraduate studies and, if reasonably 

possible, that they complete the course 

requirement$ for the doctorate. To this 

end we have in the past 4 years encouraged young geologists who joined the 

staff during the war and who had not completed their graduate training to take a 

furlough and return to the university for 

further training. Wherever possible within 

the framework of the projects on which 

they were working, we have also encouraged them to pr~pare and submit appropriate reports on parts of the geologic 

problems in which they were engaged as 

dissertations in partial fulfillment. of the 

requirements for an advanced degree. 

Currently some 80 geologists are on furlough from the Survey staff in pursuit of 

advanced university training; 18 of these 

are using results of their Survey investigations as theses. 

For a number of geologists, who 

for various reasons are unable to return 

to the university i ust now, the Survey has 

recently devised a course of lectures and 

seminars in Washington by arrangement 

with the Graduate School of the Department of Agriculture. These courses, 

given at off-duty hours, are organized and 

guided by experienced Survey geologists. 

They are aimed at broadening professional 

horizons in the younger employees and at 

developing research incentives. As far 

as we are able to judge to date, they are 

proving successful; however, they are 

not a satisfactory substitute for university graduate training, nor are they so 

intended. 

TECHNICAL DISCIPLINES 

Survey experience shows that in 

general the student who is well grounded 

in each of the fundamental geologic disciplines and in the basic sciences (physics , chemistry, mathematics, and biology) 

before concentrating on any specific. 

field in geology proves to be more suited 

to a Survey career than the one who .turns 

. to specialization in the early stag~s of 

his training. This is so partly because a 

reasonable facility with a considerable 

range of geologic skills is required by 

the diverse activities to which men on 

the Survey are likely tQ be assigned in 

their early years with the organization. 

More important, however, the broader 

training leads to a more comprehensive 

understanding of the over-all problems 

with which one must deal and quickens 

. the versatility needed to do an all-round 

job. It also leads to a freer interchange 

of ideas with one's colleagues, which in 

turn tends to develop leadership qualities 

and high esprit de corps. 

Accordingly, it is our view thatirrespective of the specialties they may 

eventually follow-·st\,ldents should have a 

sound ~raining in mineralogy, petrology 

and petrography, paleontology, stratigraphy, struct\,lral geology, geomorphology, 

map interpretation, and map construction, 

including· the elements of surveying, 

photogrammetry, and drafting. We recognize, too, that a geologist is first of all 

a scientist. We therefore feel that he 

should thoroughly understand the scientific method and, within the limits of his 

experience, know how to apply scientific principles to the solution of geologic 

problems. Moreover, as each of the geologic sciences is based in large measure 

on one or more of the basic sciences and 
4 TRAINING GEOLOGISTS 

on the border-line sciences, especially 

geophysics and geochemistry, and as 

geologic field techniques are based in 

part on the principles of engineering, we 

believe that appropriate combinations of 

these disciplines should be included in a 

geologist's early training. He should 

also have a reading and writing acquaintance with some foreign languages, a sound 

training in the use of English, and an 

appreciation of the principles of logic as 

op?osed to argumentation, and he should 

understand the need for careful documentation in scientific writing and know how 

to use geologic literature as an instrument 

of research. 

PERSONAL ATTRIBUTES 

In addition, certain personal attributes must be taken into account in 

selecting geologists for the permanent 

staff of the Survey. For example, we 

believe person~:tl int~grity is of first-order 

importance in all persons who aspire to 

any sort of scientific career and especially 

in those engaged in scientific work for · 

the Government. We also have to keep 

in mind the fact that we are a public 

agency devoted to public service. Each 

of our geologists is in some measure an 

emissary of the Survey. The rer>utation 

of the organization a·nd the success of 

his own mission depend to some extent 

upon hia capacity to l'!leet and to deal 

wisely and well with the people with whom 

he comes in contact. This is largely a 

matter of personality, tolerance- of the 

views of others, judgment, and common 

sense. 

Likewise, we must give attention 

to such attributes as personal initiative 

and willingness t.o cooperate. The program of the Survey requires close teamwork on the part of many individuals 

possessed of various skills &nd often of 

diverse points of view o Geology is becoming so specialized that group research 

is rapidly taking the place of the erstwhile lone worker who tried to do the 

whole job himself. In these circumstances 

a man should have the ability to cooperate 

with others--including his colleagues. 

We have, and we hope we always will 

have, a place in the organization for individualists, because individual initiative 

is the mainspring of scientific achievement, but the extreme individualist who 

always insists that this or that must be 

done "my way or else" and is intolerant 

of the ideas of others has to be exceedingly good to make up for the worry and 

hard feelings he engenders in the organi~ 

zation and for the excessive amount of 

time and energy that his supervisors have 

to devote toward keeping him and his associates happy o By contrast, a geologist 

endowed with a large capacity for original 

and independent thinking, who has a high 

degree of personal initiative and selfreliance and has been trained to maintain 

a keenly critical but well-balanced and 

constructive outlook, is of inestimable 

value to the organization. 

DEFICIENCIES IN TRAINING 

As a general rule we find that the 

young geologists who join the pel'manent_ 

staff of the Survey ar~ well equipped 

academically to eliter upon their duties. 

However, a few deficiencies in training 

have been rather apparent, from our viewpoint, among thoDe who have come to us 

in the past few years. For example, mf'ny 

recent recruits seem t.o have had no instruction in report writing. A considerable 

number also lack training in the nse of 

geologic literature in research and show 

little appreciation of the need for c:ueful 

documentation in scientific writing. Likewise we find that some arc not sufficiently 

trained in the use of the microscope to 

enable them to tackle the petrographic 

problems that beset every field geologist; 

others lack training in surveying and 

apparently have had little Instruction in 

field geology and no practice in ~reparing 

maps from original data. 
TRAINING FOR THE FUTURE 5 

Perhaps, in comparison with the 

past, these deficiencies may be more apparent than real, for in recent years- we 

have had to recruit a relatively large number of inexperienced personnel--among 

them, several men and women selected at 

an earlier stage in the educational process 

than was our custom in the days when 

postgraduates were willing to accept 

junior appointments. In part, however, 

the inadequacies seem to stem from the 

speed-up system and the overcrowding of 

facilities that have afflicted the universities in the postwar years. Wh&tever the 

cause, the deficiencies have created a 

situation for which corrective measures 

must be found; for the library habit is 

utterly essential to sound scientific research, the microscope is still the main 

laboratory tool- of the geologist, proficiency in making a good map is still 

fundamental to doing good field work, 

and geologists who do not know how to 

prepare acceptable reports are not quite 

ready for professional status. 

TRAINING FOR THE FUTURE 

Current trends in the Survey program 

suggest that more and more quantitative 

data and greater skill in compiling and 

interpreting them will be demanded of the 

geologists of the future. We expect, 

therefore, that Survey geologists will be 

called upon to make much greater use of 

precise mineralogic and geochemical 

techniques in studies in petrology and 

mineral exploration. We also expect to 

place more emphasis on certain phases 

of geophysics in the determination of 

concealed geologic structures, in the 

search for mineral deposits, and in problems in ground-water and· engineering 

geology. There is a similar need for the 

application of these skills and for improved mapping techniques in the study 

and interpretation of soils and other surface deposits, not only as they relate to 

problems in construction engineering and 

ground water, but also in the highly important field of soil conservation and 

land use. Moreover, we see a need for 

more emphasis on fundamental research. 

As examples, we might cite the need for 

detailed ecologic studies of living organisms to establish a firmer base and make 

more meaningful our interpretations in 

paleontology, sedimentation, and stratigraphy; and the need for the adaptation 

of appropriate skills from nuclear physics 

and geochemistry to the study of such 

problems as mineral genesis, the origin 

and circulation of aqueous solutions, the 

rate and process of oxidation and rock 

decay, and the determination of geologic 

age relations. Researches of this kind 

are a bit beyond the experience of the 

beginner, but we believe they are bound 

to become a necessary part of our future 

program. The student of today may well 

be called upon to take part in them tomorrow. This means that Survey geologists of tomorrow will need more mathematics and physics, more chemistry· and 

mineralogy, more biology, and more training in the borderline sciences. They 

probably will also need more proficiency 

in the application of statistical techniques. If this is so, somewhere along 

the line the purely geologic curriculum 

now offered in undergraduate training will 

have to become more concentrated, for 

the educationists tell us that there is no 

time for additional courses. 

How these educational goals are to 

be achieved and how the fundamentals 

that we deem essential can best be taught 

are questions that we cheerfully and confidently leave to our friends in the universities. As an agency concerned with 

research in almost every field of geology, 

the Survey wants geologists who are 

thoroughly trained in the fundamental 

geologic disciplines and ·who have the 

capacity to develop into specialists. We 

do not know of any simple formula by 

which these educational objectives can 
6 TRAINING GEOLOGISTS 

be reached. We are inclined to doubt 

that there is one. If we succeed in identifying the jobs to b.e don.e, however, and 

if--continually appraising the skills required to do them--we insist upon high 

standards, both in training and at the 

various professional levels, we are certain that adequate skills will be developed 

to achieve our aims. The history of 

science is comforting in this respect. 

0 

758!:i2