Social Effects of Automation Conference 1972-1974
Going back to 1972-1974, before Brooklyn Poly had implemented any robotics courses/initiatives, Professor A. George Schillinger was invited to attend multiple JACC Committees on Social Effects of Automation, with universities such as Ohio State University, University of Minnesota, Johns Hopkins, and Stanford also in attendance. Professor Schillinger was chairman of Polytechnic's division of management in 1957, creator and director of the Executive MS in the Management of Technology Program, and editor of the Journal of Technology in Society, while also serving as a member of the American Society for Macro-Engineering (Archives, 2024). While Schillinger was not an Electrical Engineering Professor himself, he had a background in the field, having received his B.S. in Electrical Engineering from City College of New York and his M.S. and Doctor of Engineering Science from Columbia University (Archives, 2024).
Professor Schillinger seems to be the only individual representing Brooklyn Poly at this conference, but why is that? While the archives may not have access to everyone’s documents from this conference, based on the information below about who was participating or invited, Schillinger appeared to be the only Poly representative. Though he has a background in Electrical Engineering, at Poly, he seems to have mostly experience in management, with his most relevant experience being his participation in macro-engineering, which involves designing and constructing enormous, complex structures. Based on this information, Schillinger appears to be participating in the conference from a management perspective rather than a robotics-innovation perspective. Remembering also that, in 1985, the first-ever non-CS-related course at Poly was on technology and society, which included investigating robotics trends, you start to wonder whether Schillinger may have been responsible for its implementation.
At the conference, various topics were discussed, mostly centered on automation practices and their impact on society and academia, with the files including correspondence, curricula, committee information, financials, and more. Additionally, the conference notes a contrast between the types of automation they are discussing and the traditional robotics people may be more familiar with. Below you will find two documents on topics covered at the conference in both 1972 and 1973, including the social effects of automation, the role of automation in the US technological posture, and socio-economic information related to the public and private sectors.
(Poly Archives, August 1972)
(Poly Archives, November 1973)
Some other important information shared at the conference includes how automation and the robotics industry have been driving significant, rapid changes in the field, but are not trying to replace those already working there, as well as the effects this has had on current factory workers. The two images below present these facts, which are interesting to note from the perspective of automation at the time and remain somewhat relevant today: robotics taking jobs, replacing workers, and leaving individuals unemployed. An article from 1980 by Thomas Donlan titled “Automation Moves On: Jobs Are Opening Up on the Assembly Line for Robots” similarly explores the issue about robotics taking over factory work, and is nothing like the robots we see in Star Wars, but are far more threatening, with investments predicted to become over 500 million dollars (Donlan, 1980).
The fear of automation replacing jobs could also have contributed to Poly's late start in implementing robotics, as they may not have wanted to support an industry that had the potential to replace human workers. The university also had a large manufacturing sector, so this could have been a concern. However, there is little evidence that anyone at Poly has held this stance, even though it is an interesting idea to explore.
(Poly Archives, December 1973)
(Poly Archives, December 1973)
(Poly Archives, June 1974)
Ok, so now we know that at least one person at Poly was aware of the robotics and automation advancements other universities were making, but why did it take them over 10 years to reach a place other universities were already at? Why didn’t they act on it for over 10 years, despite participating in robotics and automation conferences with other universities? Also, George Schillinger was not an expert in robotics by any means, and it is both interesting and odd that he was the only individual from Brooklyn Poly who was asked to attend this conference. Schillinger did not seem to have presented anything there, was just invited, and nothing really came from going to this conference until a few years later. The reason for this could also have been that Schillinger may have attended this conference more out of personal interest in the topic than as a school-wide representative.
While the likely explanation would be the financial implications of what the school was going through, it is also likely that Poly just did not want to, or did not yet see robotics as the tech advancement that it became. Considering they only sent one semi-unrelated professor to this conference (if they sent him at all), it almost seems like the university did not care about robotics and did not want to.