PAGENO="0001" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS OF 1967 HEARINGS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES NINETIETH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION ON H.R. 6230 A BILL TO STRENGTHEN AND IMPROVE PROGRAMS OF ASSISTANCE FOR ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION BY EXTENDING AUTHORITY FOR ALLOCATION OF FUNDS TO BE USED FOR EDU- CATION OF INDIAN CHILDREN AND CHILDREN IN OVERSEAS DE- PENDENT SCHOOLS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, BY EXTENDING AND AMENDING THE NATIONAL TEACHER CORPS PROGRAM, BY PROVIDING ASSISTANCE FOR COMPREHENSIVE EDU- CATIONAL PLANNING, AND BY IMPROVING PROGRAMS OF EDUCA- TION FOR TIlE HANDICAPPED; TO IMPROVE PROGRAMS OF VOCA- TIONAL EDUCATION; TO IMPROVE AUTHORITY FOR ASSISTANCE TO SCHOOLS IN FEDERALLY IMPACTED AREAS AND AREAS SUFFER- ING A MAJOR DISASTER: AND FOR OThER PURPOSES HEARINGS HELD IN WASHINGTON, D.C., MARCH 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, 1(3, 17, 18, AND 20, 19(37 PART 2 Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and Labor CARL D. PERKINS, Chairman U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 75-492 WAShINGTON 1OEIT PAGENO="0002" COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR CARL D. PERKINS, Kentucky, Chairman EDITH GREEN, Oregon FRANK THOMPSON, Ja., New Jersey ELMER J. HOLLAND, Pennsylvania JOHN H. DENT, Pennsylvania ROMAN C. PUCINSKI, Illinois DOMINICK V. DANIELS, New Jersey JOHN BRADEMAS, Indiana JAMES G. O'HARA, Michigan HUGH L. CAREY, New York AUGUSTUS F. HAWKINS, California SAM GIBBONS, Florida WILLIAM D. FORD, Michigan WILLIAM D. HATHAWAY, Maine PATSY T. MINK, Hawaii JAMES H. SCHEUER, New York LLOYD MEEDS, Washington PHILLIP BURTON, California CARL ALBERT, Ok1~hom& II WILLIAM H. AYRES, Ohio ALBERT H. QJJIE, Minnesota CHARLES E. GOODELL, New York JOHN M. ASHBROOK, Ohio ALPHONZO BELL, California OGDEN R. REID, New York EDWARD J. GURNEY, Florida JOHN N. ERLENBORN, Illinois WILLIAM J. SCHERLE, Iowa JOHN DELLENBACK, Oregon MARVIN L. ESCH, Michigan EDWIN D. ESHLEMAN, Pennsylvania JAMES C. GARDNER, North Carolina WILLIAM A. STEIGER, Wisconsin PAGENO="0003" CONTENTS Hearings held in Washington, D.C.: Page March 9, 1967 833 March 10, 1967_ 901 March 13, 1967_ 951 March 14, 1967_ 1021 March 15, 1967_ 1089 March 16, 1967_ 1283 March 17, 1967 1339 March 18, 1967 1465 March 20, 1967 1581 Statement of- Ackerman, Joseph, president, National School Boards Associati oii, accompanied by Hugh Calkins, Paul N. Carlin, and Harold W. Webb 1436 Adams, Hon. Brock, a Member of Congress from the State of Wash- ington 841 Baker, James E., superintendent of schools, i\liddleshoro, Ky 983 Benjamin, i\lrs. Marjorie, the Citizens Committee for Children 1563 Bergman, Mrs. Lewis J., Citizens Schools Committee of Chicago - - - 1334 Bieiniller, Andrew J., AFL-CIO, accompaiiied by Walter l)avis, director, AFL-CIO Departm"nt of Education, and Jack Ses~ioiis, assistant director, AFL-CIO Department of Education and inem- her of the School Board of the District of Columbia 1343 Bolling, Hon. Eichard, a Member of Congress from the State of Missouri 833 Bowman, Dr. Garda W., program coordinator, special projects, Bank Street College of Education 1545 Breit, Fred, deputy superintendent, Seattle Public Schools, Seattle, Wash 842 Buchanan, Dr. Paul, superintendent of schools, Jacksoii County, N.C 1283 Burkhead, G. C., superintendent, Hardin County Schools, Elizabeth- town, Ky 953 Byrne, Dr. J. A., director, Division of Education, College of St. ~Thomas, St. Paul, Minn 1098 Clark, Charles, superintendent, Floyd County Schools, Fres tonsbuig, Ky 977 Cline, Edward L., Sr., on behalf of the Omaha Tribe of Macy, Nehr~ 1287 Dodson, Marvin, executive secretary, Kentucky E du cation Associa- tion, Louisville, Ky 951 Donohue, Monsignor James C., director, Department of Education, U.S. Catholic Conference, aeccompanied by Monsignor William McManus, archdiocese superintendent of education, Chicago, and Mr. John Cicco 1154 Eater, John W., superintendent of schools, Rantoul, Ill 1408 Edgar, J. E., commissioner of education, Austin, Tex., represented by J. Warren Hitt, deputy commissioner of edueation 905 Farrell, Sister Miriam J., supervisor, Archdiocesan Schools, Gilrov, Calif 901 Goble, Russell, Martin County schools, Kentucky 1465 Hanks, J. M., superintendent, Ysleta School District, El Paso, Tex~ 1420 Hazlett, Dr. James, superintendent of schools, Kansas City, \Io__ 834 lIolt, Charles, superintendent of schools, South Bend, Tad ~5() Hood R. E., superintendent of schools, Brunswick, Ga 1414 Johnson, Carroll, superintendent of schools, White Plains, N.Y 865 "I PAGENO="0004" IV CONTENTS Statement by-Continued Keith, Everett, executive secretary, Missouri State Teachers Associa- tion; \\ arren Phillips, superintendent of schools; Harold Spears, superintendent of schools; Forest Conner, executive secretary, Page American Association of School Administrators 1025 Levin, Mrs. ~ athan W., chairman of the Educational Services Section of the Citizens Committee for Children 1553 Lihassi, F. Peter, Special Assistant to the Secretary of HEW for Civil Rights, accompanied by Mrs. Ruby Martin, Special Assistant for Education; Mr. Derrick Bell, Deputy Special Assistant for Civil Rights: and Mr. Edward Yorman, General Counsel for Civil Rights 1498, 1581 Lumley, John M., director, T)ivision of Federal Relations, NEA; Mrs. Mary C. Gereau and Mr. Stanley J. McFarland, members of the staff 1056 Lund, Kenneth W., senior vice president, Scott, Foresman & Co.; American Book Publishers Council and American Textbolk Pub- lishers Institute 1450 Marburger, Dr. Carl, Assistant Commissioner for Education, Bureau of Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior 1021 Martin, Mrs. Ruby, staff assistant, Office of the Secretary, HEW..~_ 1581 Mattheis, Dr. Duane, commissioner of education, State board of education, St. Paul. Minn 1090 McNeill, W. R., superintendent, Bowling Green Independent Schools, Bowling Green, Ky Megel, Carl J., Washington representative, American Federation of Teachers 1348 Miller, Dr. Richard, director, program on educational change, Uni- versity of Kentucky 908 Nagle, John F., chief, Washington office, National Federation of the Blind 1339 Niemeyer, John H., president, Bank Street College of Education, accompanied by Mrs. Verona Williams and Dr. Gordon Kopf 1124 Noe, Samuel V., superintendent, Louisville Independent Schools, Louisville, Ky 968 Osview, Leonard, assistant dean, College of Education, Temple University 1324 Panel of members of the National Teachers Corps: Dr. John W. Letson, Miss Rhoda Newman, Mrs. Babbara Goodwin, Miss Dorothy Hornsby, and Miss Thomasine Haskins, all of Georgia..-- 1293 Pogue, Henry, Jr., chairman, State Board of Education, Common- wealth of Kentucky 981 Risner, Bueford, superintendent of Bath County Schools, Owings- yule, Ky 1540 Rose, Oscar, superintendent of schools, Oklahoma; R. E. Hood, Brunswick, Ga., Richard Taylor, John W. Eater, Rantoul, Ill.; T. Olai Hageness, Clover Park Schools, Tacoma, Wash.; William Simmons, Detroit, Mich.; and J. K. Hanks, El Paso, Tex 1386 Ryan, Mrs. Edward T., chairman for legislation National Congress of Parents and Teachers 1456 Smith, Leon T., superintendent, McCracken County Schools, Paducah, Ky Spaulding, Hugh C., superintendent of Marion County Schools, Lebanon, Ky 991 Stapleton, Ernest, assistant superintendent of schools, Albuquerque, N. Mex 852 Stimbert, E. C., superintendent, Memphis City Schools and member of the Executive Committee of the American Association of School Administrators 1026 Swanson, Austin 1)., associate professor of education, State University of New York at Buffalo 1142 Taylor, Richard, silperint en(leflt, WTidefield School, Colorado Springs, Cob 1416 Torrence, I )r. Andrew P., dean of academic affairs, Tuskegee Institute, Tusk~ee, Ala 903 V an fT oo-e, Ri chard, superinten dent, Jefferson County Public Schools, Ky PAGENO="0005" CONTENTS V Statement by-Continued Vittetow, Frank, assistant superintendent, Bureau of State-Federal Page Relations Department of Education, Frankfort, Ky 963 Watkins, Hon. Sam, member of the Legislature, State of Kentuckv 1002 Willenberg, Ernest P., president, Council for Exceptional Children, NEA, accompanied by William C. Geer, executive secretary, Council for Exceptional Children, NEA 1139 Wilson, Dr. Donald E., director, teacher education, School of Edit- cation, University of Southern California 1318 Statements, letters, supplemental material, etc.: Ackerman, Dr. Joseph, president, National School Boards Association, statement by 1442 American Parents Committee, Inc., statement of 1333 Biemiller, Andrew J., AFL-CIO: "Design for an Effective Schools Program in Urban Centers," publication entitled 1370 Statement by the AFL-CIO Executive Council on Education and the Federal Government, February 23, 1967, Bad Harbour, Fla 1367 Bottomly, Forbes, superintendent of schools, Seattle Public Schools, Seattle, Wash., letter to Chairman Perkins, dated March 30, 1967~ 1717 Bowman, Garda W., program coordinator, special projects, Bank Street College of Education: Illustrations of the need for comprehensive, systematic, and con- tinuing planning of education at all levels 1546 S. 721, text of bill 1550 Testimony by 1544 Brademas, Hon. John, a Representative in Congress from the State of Indiana, editorial in Life Magazine 1718 Breit, Fred, deputy superintendent, Seattle Public Schools, Seattle, Wash.: How can Public Law 89-lobe improved? 844 Seattle School District No. 1 as related to Public Law S9-ltL__ 845 Buchanan, H. P., superintendent, Jackson County Schools, Sylva, N.C., statement by 1286 Carnegie Quarterly, article entitled, "The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Poorer-Schools' 1574 Carr, Thomas W., National Advisory Council on the Education of Disadvantaged Children 1703 Chishoim, Dr. Robert L., superintendent, Albuquerque Public Schools, "Programs developed under the Elementary and Secondary Educa- tion Act of 1965," a report to 852 Exhibit A.-General evaluation 858 Exhibit B.-School counseling 858 Exhibit C.-Learning materials centers 859 Exhibit D.-1966 Headstart program 859 Exhibit E.-Federal funding, office of new programs, Albuquerque Public Schools 860 Consedine, William R., director, Legal Department, National Catholic Welfare Conference, "The Constitutionality of the Church-Related Schools in Federal Aid to Education," reprint from the Georgetown Law School Journal 1161 Darling, Dr. Richard L., director, Department of Instructional Materials, Montgomery County Public Schools, Maryland, and president, American Association of School Librarians, statement by.. 1704 Eater, John W., superintendent of schools, Rantoul, Ill.: Comparison of growth percentages in Rantoul (table) 1411 Table 1.-Percentage of Federal impact-current school year, 1965-66 1409 Table 11.-Federal impact in Rantoul City Schools (elementary only) 1409 Table 111.-Growth comparison-Rantoul City Schools-19-vear period 1409 Table IV.-12 heaviest federally impacted districts in Illinois. - - 1412 Table V-Construction projects in Illinois filed prior to cutoff date of February 20, 1967 1413 Estes, Nolan, Associate Cominissi'n~er, H E\V, letter to Congressman Brademas. dated March 15, 1~C 1604 PAGENO="0006" CONTENTS Statements, letters, supplemental material, etc .-Continued Ford, Hon. William D., a Representative in Congress from the State of Michigan; table in International Municipal Statistical Bulletin showing State by State the total educational bonds asked for and Page passed in dollars for elementary and secondary education 1044 Gilpin, Alfred W., chairman, Omaha Tribal Council, Macy, Nebr., letter to Chairman Perkins, enclosing a letter to Senator Hruska. - 1714 Griffiths, Daniel E., dean, School of Education, New York Education, statement by 1576 Hazlett, James A., superintendent of schools, Kansas City, Mo., testimony of 838 Hornsby, Dorothy Elizabeth, principal, Mary McLeod Bethune Elementary School, Atlanta Public Schools, Atlanta, Ga., testimony by 1300 Johnson, Albert C., superintendent, School District of the City of Benton Harbor, Mich., letter to Chairman Perkins, dated March 9, 1967 1709 Johnson, Carroll F., superintendent of schools, White Plains, N.Y., statement of 870 Knutzen, Owen A., acting superintendent of schools, Omaha Public Schools, Omaha, Nebr., letter to Chairman Perkins, dated February 23, 1967 1712 Letson, Dr. John W., superintendent, Atlanta Public Schools, Atlanta, Ga., testimony by 1304 Levin, Mrs. Nathan W., chairman, Educational Services Section of the Citizens Committee for Children, statement of 1553 Libassi, F. Peter, Special Assistant to the Secretary of HEW for Civil Rights: Clark, Hon. Ramsey, Attorney General, letter to Senator Russell B. Long, dated March 2, 1967 1515 Letter to Chairman Perkins, enclosing principal documents relat- ing to the enforcement of title I with respect to school desegra- gation 1605 Administration sends to Congress tightened and strength- ened Economic Opportunity Act of 1967, press release 1628 Estimated fall enrollment in fifth grade compared with high school graduates S years later: United States, 1948-56 to 1964-72 (table) 1628 Estimated percentage of nonwhites (or Negroes) and whites (or others) enrolled in public schools, by kindergarten, ele- mentary, and secondary level, in 21 large cities: 1960 and currently (table) 1605 Information on the amount of funds available for the admin- istration of title VI for school desegregation for each of the last 3 fiscal years (table) 1623 List of complaints from September 1 through March 22, broken down by State 1616 Memorandum from Commissioner Howe to chief State school officers 1618 Memorandum from Louis J. McGuinness to Miss Carol Herzman 1623 "Success Stories," (brief summaries of districts that have moved effectively in the area of school desegregation)__ 1609 Summary of the basis and general content of the economic opportunity amendments of 1967 1624 Material on school desegregation policies of HEW Office of Edu- cation under title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 1630 Authority for the 1966 school desegregation guidelines 1644 Civil rights compliance in summer programs operated under title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended," memorandum for chief school officers, February S, 1967 1621 Commissioner Howe's letter to Austin R. Meadows, super- intendeiit of edticat ion, State department of education, Montgomery, Ala., August 9, 1966 1669 Compliance with th ~Civil Rights Act with respect to the pioct- to U filed for fiscal year 1967 under title I 1618 PAGENO="0007" CONTENTS VII Statements, letters, supplemental material, etc.-Continued Libassi, F. Peter, Special Assistant to the Secretary of HEW-Con. Material on school desegregation policies, etc.-Continued "Distinguishing `new' and `continuing' activities for title I applicant's whose funds have been deferred pending com- pliance with civil rights guidelines," memorandum to State Page title coordinators, ESEA, August 17, 1966 1670 Fuibright, Senator J. W., letter to Commissioner Howe, dated April 5, 1966, and reply, May 24, 1966 1660 Gardner, Hon. John W., Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, letter to Senator Carl Hayden, dated Decem- ber 30, 1966 1673 Howe letter to Senator Stennis, enclosing February 24, 1967, memo, Mr. Yourman to Commissioner Howe 1676 Howe, Hon. Harold, II, Commissioner of Education, DHEW, statement of 1663 "Responsibilities of State education agencies in assuring com- pliance for State approved projects," memorandum from Harold Howe II, U.S. Commissioner of Education, to chief State school officers 1668 "Review of legal authority for the 1966 school desegregation guidelines," memorandum from Alanson W. Wilcox, General Counsel, to the Secretary 1513 "School districts operating under free choice desegregating plans," memorandum for 1620 "Schools Get a Year's Grace," article in the Atlanta Consti- tution 1696 "Special civil rights compliance problems in summer pro- grams under title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act," memorandum from Commissioner Howe to chief State school officers, April 25, 1966 1667 Title VI-Civil Rights Act of 1964 1630 "Title Vi-Civil Rights Act-revised statement of policies for desegregation plans-test of performance," memo- randum from Alanson Willcox, General Counsel, to Harold Howe II, Commissioner of Education, dated March 7, 1966 1656 Title 45-Public Welfare (reprinted from the Federal Reg- ister, Friday, Dec. 4, 1964) 1631 "Use of title I funds in local school district undergoing desegregation or in racially segregated attendance areas, memorandum to chief State school officers and State title I coordinators, February 27, 1967 1621 Memorandum by HEW General Counsel: "Legal basis for the policies of the revised guidelines" 1670 Revised statement of policies for school desegreg:itiaii plaiisuimcler title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 1498 "Schools Get a Year's Grace," article in t lie Atlanta Constitu- tion, March 10, l967 1512 Statement of 1537 Statistical sununary on title VI administrative (nforcemn~11t ac- tions by the department for the 1966-67 school year (under the revised guidelines) 1511 Logan, William T., Jr., commissioner of education, State of Maine. statement by 1712 Lumley, John ~s1., director, Division of Federal Relations, Xatioiial Edu~tion Association: Letter to Chairman Perkins, dated May 3, 1966 1059 NEA questionnaire on Teacher Corps 1083 Testimony by 1056 Lund, Kenneth W., senior vice president, Scott, Foresman, & Co.; American Book Publishers Council and American Textbook Pub- lishers Institute, statement by 1453 Marland, S. P., Jr., superintendent, Pittsburgh Public Schools, Pittsburgh, Pa.: Letter from, dated April 13, 1967 1697 Programs umicler title I, ESEA which are shared with nonpublic schools 1698 Tabulation of programs under ESEA title I 1697 PAGENO="0008" vm CONTENTS Statements, letters, supplemental material, etc.-Continued 1\Iattheis, Dr. Duane J., commissioner of education, State of Minne- Pag sota, newspaper article entitled, "Teacher Loss Up in City Schools". 1096 Moss, Hon. John E., a Representative in Congress from the Sate of California: Letter from Chairman Perkins, dated March 17, 1967 1573 Lohman, Joseph D., chairman, California Advisory Compensa- tory Education Commission, Sacramento, Calif., statement oL 1573 National Education Association, excerpts from NEA research report, 1966, October 1966 1470 Newman, Dr. Rhoda Spruce, assistant professor, and Director of the National Teacher Corps Center, University of Georgia, Athens, Ga., testimony by 1297 Niemeyer, John H., president, Bank Street College of Education: Testimony by 1129 A composite picture of 15 demonstration training programs for auxiliary school personnel conducted in 1966 1238 A profile of a project to train auxiliary school personnel (teacher aids) in conjunction with an NDEA institute for advanced st.u(Iy for teachers of disadvantaged children 1255 A project to train migrants for nonprofessional jobs (teacher aids) 1266 "Auxiliary School Personnel: Their Roles, Training, and Institu- tionalization," study entitled 1131 Profile of a program for teacher education and parent-teacher aids in a culturally different community 1248 Profile of a project for training auxiliary school personnel as family aids 1270 Profile of orientation-training program for teachers and teacher aids working in the 1966 summer Headstart project 1260 Noe, Samuel V., superintendent of schools, Louisville, Ky., statement by 971 Exhibit A-Federal expenditures 1965-66, 1966-67 (table) 973 Exhibit B-Evaluation of Federal programs 973 Exhibit C-Learn more earn more adult education program~.~ 976 "Federal Team Checks School Program-Use of Funds for Dis- advantaged Children Praised," article in the Courier-Journal_ 976 Polley, Ira, superintendent of public instruction, State of Michigan, letter to Chairman Perkins, dated March 31, 1967 1716 Roth, Herrick S., vice president, Legislative Committee, AFT Execu- tive Council, president, Colorado Labor Council, AFL-CIO, testi- monyby 1366 Rose, Oscar, superintendent of schools, Midwest City, Okla.: Applicants and Federal funds requested (table) 1392 Chart 1.-Enrollment growth from 1950 to the present and esti- mated to 1970 and the corresponding degree of Federal impact_. 1397 Chart 11.-Pupil turnover as related to proximity to Federal impact. area 1398 Chart 111.-Range of student mean performance of sixth grade classes Iowa tests of basic skills-Clover Park Schools 1399 Chart IV.-Clover Park per pupil valuation compared with other first-class districts, Washington State 1399 Tabulation 1.-Maximum operating funds available from high to low without Public Law 874 funds 1388 Tabulation 11.-Assessed valuation per pupil in each school dis- trict 1389 Tabulation 111.-Total tax le~ied for educational purposes 1390 Schunk, Dr. Victoria, chairman, legislative program committee, and Dr. Lois Roth, area representative, education legislative program, American Association of University Women, letter to Chairman Perkins, dated March 21, 1967 1715 Scott, Mrs. Mary Jane, Ralph Waldo Emerson School, Newton Upper Falls, Mass.: An analysis made in Newton of our approaches with dis- advantaged children 1707 Copy of letter to the Boston Herald replying to their articles, "Are the Rich Getting Richer?" 1708 Letter to Chairman Perkins, dated March 9, 1967 1706 PAGENO="0009" CONTENTS IX Statements, letters, supplemental material, etc.-Continued Simmons, William, deputy superintendent, Detroit Public Schools, Page testimony of 1402 Sizer, Theodore R., dean, Graduate School of Education, Harvard University, telegram to Chairman Perkins 1285 Swanson, Austin D., associate professor of education, State University of New York at Buffalo: Letter to August W. Steinhilber, dated December 7, 1966 1145 Steinhilber, August W., specialist for legislation, HEW, letter from, dated November 18, 1966 1144 Steinhilber, August W., specialist for legislation, HEW, letter from, dated December 22, 1966 1146 Taylor, Richard D., superintendent, Widefield-Security Schools, testimony of 1418 Tunney, Hon. John V., a Representative in Congress from the State of California, letter to Chairman Perkins, enclosing a statement by Bruce Miller, superintendent of schools, Riverside Unified School District 1710 Whitten, Hon. Jamie L., a Representative in Congress from the State of Mississippi, letter to Chairman Perkins, dated March 2, 1967~ 1713 Whittier, Dr. C. Taylor, superintendent of schools, the School District of Philadelphia: Federal funding needs, School District of Philadelphia, Pa 1700 Poindexter, Robert L., deputy superintendent, letter to Chairman Perkins, dated April 10, 1967 1699 Willenberg, Ernest P., president, the Council for Exceptional Children, NEA, statement of 1137 Wilson, Dr. Donald E., director, Teacher Education, School of Edu- cation, Temple University, newspaper article entitled "Teacher Corps Makes Impact in Watts-They Hustle Education" 1318 Wright, Winnie, librarian, Fleiningsburg Elementary School, Flem- ingsburg Elementary Library, Flerningsburg, Ky., letter to Chair- man Perkins, dated March 8, 1967 1710 Younglund, Donald E., assistant director, Federal programs, Wichita Public Schools, Unified School District No. 259, Wichita, Kans., letter to Chairman Perkins, dated January 27, 1967 1706 PAGENO="0010" PAGENO="0011" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDJICATION AMENDMENTS OF 1967 THURSDAY, MARCH 9, 1967 HOE-SE OF REPRESENTATIVES. CoM~IIrrEE ox EDUCATION AND LABOR. 1Vaskii~qtoi~. D.C. The committee met at 9 :30 a.m., pursuant. to recess, in room 2175, Ravburn House Office Building, Hon. Carl D. Perkins (chairman of the committee) presiding. Present: Representatives Perkins. Green, Dent, Brademas, Ford, Hathaway, Meeds, Quie, Bell, Reid. Erlenborn, Scherle, Dellenback, and Steiger. Staff members present: Robert E. MeCord, senior specialist, H. D. Reed, Jr., general counsel, William D. Gaul, associate general counsel, Benjamin F. Reeves, editor, and Louise M. Dargans, research assistant. Chairman PERKINS. The committee will be in order. We are de- lighted to welcome this morning a fine Member of this Congress who has been one of our most prominent members in the Committee on Rules and who has done so much in seeing to it that educational legis- lation, reported by this committee, actually came to a vote on the floor of the House. It is a great pleasure to welcome our distinguished colleague, the Honorable Richard Bolling, to introduce the Kansas City superin- tendent of schools. STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD BOLLING, A MEMBER OF CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MISSOURI Mr. BOLLING. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am very pleased to have the privilege of being with the. committee today. As you have said, the field of education has been one of my intere~ts for many years. In fact., I am a. teacher. It is a particular pleasure, because. it is my first opportunity t.o be here since your chairmanship and also because I have the privilege of introducing to the committee the man who is not only the superin- tendent. of schools in Kansas City. but. an old and good personal friend of mine. He has had a remarkable career. He came up through the ranks the hard way. He has survived a great many difficulties in the Kansas City area. a.nd survived them with honor. skill, and ability. It gives me great pleasure to present. to the eommittee Mr. James A. I-Tazlett, Superintendent of Schools, Kansas City. Mo. Thank you, sir. PAGENO="0012" 834 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDIJCATION AMENDMENTS STATEMENT OF DR. JAMES KAZLETT, SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOlS, KANSAS CITY, MO. Mr. HAZLETT. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name, as Congressman Boiling has indicated, is James A. Hazlett, superintendent of schools, Kansas City, Mo. I am pleased to have the opportunity to express to the committee our appreciation of the many opportunities which have been availed our district a.s a result of the passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.. The Kansas City School District has an enrollment of 75.000 pupils from kindergarten through the 12th grade. About one-third of the enrollment, or 23,000. can be described as culturally disadvaiitage.d or economically deprived; 43 percent of the enrollment is Negro. The availability of funds under title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act was immediately recognized as an oppor- tiinity to expand and intensify a very modest locally financed program of compensatory education in the amount of $150,000 which is still a part of our title I effort. When we became the recipients of about $1,800,000 in fiscal 1966 to lauiicli a specialized program to meet the needs of the culturally disadvantaged, we created a division in our school system called urban education and placed an assistant superintendent in charge because we wanted to give an individual sufficient range and status that he could develop specially designed programs that. would become an important part. of our regular school offerings without. any differentiation-being a second level program-or that its needs would be met after the regular program. We proce.ede(l to develop a title I program that would meet the needs of about 13,000 pupils in 21 schools, who could be described as the nio~t seriously disadvantaged. The expenditure of funds was concent rat e.d there. We emphasized reading and the language arts as being the focal point, for most of our efforts. We established workshops, reading specialists working with classroom teachers, reading centers, reading consultants and supervisors, teachers of speech and hearing, and then we set up a curriculum production center for producing leariiing materials that. would be. more appropriate, to these particular young people. All of these are receiving attention. We have endeavored to set up programs that would permit the individual teacher to exercise her strengths and to function without the responsibilities of all the iobs in the classroom. We are trying to departmentalize some teaching, use teacher aids, develop team teaching, and we have within the area a pilot, program in one school where we are working in counselors, social workers, and psychological workers, while in another school we have a model resource or library center which we hope to extend into the other schools of the area. Part of the design is to interpret to the area being served exactly what we are doing, to gain the support of parents in the community and to involve them in planning and hold classes for parents. Built in. of course, as required by law-, are evaluations procedures to deter- mine the efforts we are making are producing results. PAGENO="0013" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 835 It. is going to take. some little time, actually loiiger than the life of the act, probably, to determine if the special intensihed eflorts are really improving the achievements levels and the adjustment of the young people being served. Chairman PEIIKINS. You are prepared to evaluate at this moment 1 hat the special piogiams offer considerable value, though, to your city Mr. iI-L~zL~'r1'. I don't think there is any question but what the recognition on the part. of the people being served and the entire city that this attempt to uplift the community through education is con- sidered to be positive and helpful. Chairman PERKINS. In other words, you can already see present results? Mr. I-L~ZLET. Yes; in terms of attitudes and response. We know that in the summer months there is an ordinary learning loss for students and we are attempting to enroll at least 75 percent of eligible, students for half-day summer programs. The success of any such program means that. the staff must under- stand the added emphasis, the new techniques, the sociological prob- ie.ius, and so forth. Therefore, inservice education for principals, teachers, teacher aids, and supportive, workers is receiving considerable attention in the. first year. An important consideration we feel is that if the title I effort is t.o be nieaningful over a. period of time that we ought to have some knowl- edge. of funding that would permit us to plan in the years ahead, a.nd t.hat allocations should synchronize with our budget. planning. We received ~l,80(),000 in fiscal 1966 to spend now in 6 months; $1,600,000 in l9(Vi to spend in 12 months. If we knew for 1968, 1969, and 1910 approximately what the allo- eat ions would be aiid they would be available in time to hire a staff, I am sure we could have a better, more organized, and more efficient pi~ogram. \Vithin the same area of service and under the same assist- ant superinten(lent, we incorporated the Headstart program. We feel it would be better if it were placed under the U.S. Office of Educa- tion because. it is essentially a preschool educational program, serving the same objectives as title I, and that we could administer it more economically and be more certain of the timing. Title III has been helpful to us. We have been able, as a. local educational agency, to act in behalf of all the. schools of Jackson County in which our school S stem is located in setting up a pilot (lia~nost.ic and behavioral enhancement. center, serving some 12 t.o 15 school districts as well as the parochial school system. For the first time these other districts have had the availability of ~)sycliological psychiatric diagnosis services and a center where chil- dren-probleni children can be taken and carry on their schooling away from the regular school which they ordinarily attend. We have a secon(l grant, providing opportunities to plan for the use of a coni- ~ in eighth-giade science and mathematics. Mr. Fonu. Might I ask a. question at this l)oint, Mr. Chairman ? I might have to leave l)efOre all of the gentlemen have testified to attemid an executive session of another committee. (`linirman Psmucixs. Proceed. PAGENO="0014" 836 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. FoRD: I notice in your testimony you lay it right on the line that you believe Headstart not oniy should be transferred to HEW but should become a part of title I. This is the strongest recommendation that anyone has made in this regard. This puts you out ahead of anyone else in talking about a transfer. Do you really mean you want it to become part of title I of the Ele- mentary and Secondary Education Act? I am not trying to trap you. I just point out to you do you really mean it when you stop to realize that time funds in title I can only go directly to a public school agency and therefore the non-public-school agencies operating under Head- start would not be included? Is that what you mean Mr. IIAZLETT. You raise a point I had not given full consideration to. I was thinking in terms of objectives of Headstart compared to title I rather than the availability of funds to nonpublic agencies. However, it would seem to me that under a public educational agency the same students would be benefited regardless of who administers the money. Mr. FORD. Are all the children in your city in the program of the public school system? Mr. HAZLETT. In our school system the only Headstart program is operated in our city by the public school system; yes. Mr. Forw. You don't have any parochial schools or private agencies operating Mr. }IAzLErF. No. The contract from the community action agency is with the public schools system to set up the Headstart programs in the entire area. Mr. FORD. I thmnk I should tell you that approximately 30 percent of all the Fleadstart programs in the country and about 10 percent of all the children who are in Headstart are not in public school agencies. In the State of Mississippi no public school agency would handle Headstart. So we set up a community action program clown there in a small college in northern MissiSSipl)i wh~eh administers Headstart on a statewide basis. If we do what you are suggesting on page 4 of your testimony we would have to do one additional thing. WTe would have to convince the entire Congress that we ought to take the protective language out of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which was a con- dition to our getting this legislaiton passed, because the church-State issue is always just below the surface around here. But for the very restrictive language that we put in the Elementary ~e~onclary Education Act in 1935 we would not have passed it. So ilmore is no chance of changing that language and having a bill. This means that if we follow the suggestion you are making, and as I pointed out you go further than anyone who has suggested this up until now. by specifying that it~ go into the education act, we will put 11ead~tart out of business in Mississippi, we will put it out of business on the Indian reservations, we will put it out of business in those parts of the country where the only available resources have been nonpublic or church oriented. predominantly small programs. Though it is f~I) percent of the total number of programs~ only 10 percent of the children crc affected. But almost all of the Headstart PAGENO="0015" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 837 programs that are dealing with the American Indians, for example, and most of them that are available to migrant worker's children are operated by nonpublic agencies, or by agencies other than public school systems. Some of them are, in fact, public agencies, but they are outside the school system. What I am really asking you, and I am sure that the other gentlemen will be asked about it later, are you really saying that you want to turn Headstart into a straight, no-nonsense education-type program administered by the public schools across the country and get everybody else out of it? Mr. IiAzr~rr. I consider that the Headstart. is a preschool, educa-. tion-type program. - Mr. Foiw. You qualified that. You said "preschool, education-type program." That is exactly what we think it is; an education pro- gram. But if you don't put the word "type" in there, you are not describing it as we have in the legislation. But again that is not what your testimony says. Mr. IL~zirn"r. In terms of my experience in my community, I would like to see Headstart administered under title I, in terms of our own community. I am not sufficiently knowledgeable, and I do not know in other communities there have been some problems about the rela- tionship between the local public school system and the community action groups, and that there are some complications of one kind or another that do not appear in our own situation. Mr. Foiw. You are aware that we have a couple of States that have constitutional prohibitions against the expenditure of public funds for the education of children below the age of 6? Mr. }IAzr~rr. Yes. Mr. FoRD. We had some difficulty in those places in running the Headstart program through the schools. But the schools have been able to contract with local community action agencies, which is another category of people concerned with what you are suggesting here. What I am trying to do is to ask you to reflect a little bit on whether you want to go this far. WTe are making a record here and somebody on the floor will say, "We had a group of school superintendents in and they are back home and know how the program works. They say it should be in title I." Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead, Mr. Hazlett. Mr. HAZLETT. I think I have already indicated that with respect to title I we feel we could use more money in developing programs for the disadvantaged, that the allocation should be made in such a way that we can build into our budget our personnel and plan moie efficiently. Wnith respect to the current amendments before the House Com- mittee on Education and Labor, I would like to commend the amend- ments to the Vocational Xct and to the Teacher Corps. We have great difficulty, as do all city school systems, in working for disadvan- taged youth in recruit.ing teaching personnel and others to work in those schools. We believe that internships provided under the Teacher Corps, under the supervision of an experienced tee eher, would provide us per- PAGENO="0016" 838 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS sonnel that we could use during the internship program, and that ultimately they could be recruited as regular teachers in the school system. We also would like to make the point that we feel `that. this type of internship program working with local universities might make a change in the training of teachers. We would hope ultimately that all teachers certified would have had sufficient background to be knowledgeable of the problems confronting educators in slum areas, of the large c.ities. We have in our region where we recruit teachers only one public college that is making any systematic attempt to train their young people to go into the urban community. We worked out internship programs with them and we have about a 50 percent record in hiring those who do take their practice teaching in those areas. We also have a group of private colleges, small col- leges, who agreed to band together some 14 of them, and under the regional laboratory work out a. plan where students will take intern- ship in Kansas City, Mo.. and Kansas City, Kans. So we think we. see some values, not. only practically but ultimately, in teacher training in the national Teacher Corps, and agree tha.t it should be under title I because it is working with the kinds of students that are. the objectives of the efforts of title I. The expansion of the Vocational Act to do more planning and development in the field of vocational training is especially significant to us, I think, in the area of work study. We have, one project iii- volving the Rotary Club where some 47 dropouts this year on a part-time. part-time school basis have made complete changes in their attitu(les toward school working with adults. Some. of them have gone to night school a.nd some have actually reentered the regular school program. We need to experiment with guidance programs a.t earlier ages, vocational guidance programs at earlier ages. than presently we do and the availability of funds to work with young people in terms of vocational information would be very important. particularly with the disadvantaged. There is one other comment I would like to make with respect to co1fl1)reheflS~Ve planning at the State levels, this, iii our judgment, would be very valuable, to subsidize State departments of education. I am somewhat concerned that. the wording, which implies possibly it could be some other State agency than the State department of education, is indicated. In our judgment, the exist.ing St.ate. departments should have the privilege of ihe. overall planning. There are a number of matters which I have listed in my printed testimony which would be very appropriate for study in the State of Missouri. I think, Mr. Chairman, that concludes my statement-any state- ment I care to make at this time. (The document referred to follows:) TEsTIMONY OF JAMES A. HAZLETT, SFPF.RINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, KANSAS CITY, MISSOrRI My name is James A. Hazlett, Superintendent of the School District of Kansas City. Missouri. The District occupies 80 square miles, most of which is in a Kansas City inirnicipality comprising 320 square miles, but part of it is in the city of Independence. The enrollment is 75,000 pupils from kindergarten through PAGENO="0017" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS S39 the 12th grade; certified employees number about 3.000 and the operating budg- et approximates $40,000,000. About one-third of the enrollment can be described as culturally disadvantaged or economically deprived. Forty-three percent of the enrollment is Negro. The availability of funds under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act was immediately recognized as an opportunity to expand and intensify a very modest locally financed program of compensatory education in the amount of $150,000 which is still a part of our Title I effort. Organization- ally, our approach was two-fold: (1) to interpret any programs financed under Title I as a part of our regular offering, not a second-level program, not one that would be provided personnel or services after the regular program needs were met; and (2) to give the person in charge sufficient rank to proceed to (levelop programs and make decisions with a minimum amount of delay. A division of Urban Education was created under the direction of an assistant superintendent charged with the responsibility of administering Title I programs, Readstart, and similar activi~es. Program development proceeded under the following principles: 1. INTENSIFICATION AND SATURATION Rather than spread funds over all schools having eligible students, a group of 21 schools (17 public and 4 parochial, enrolling over 15.000 pupils) w-ith the most seriously disadvantaged pupils were selected and expenditure of funds was concentrated there. If and when funds are increased, we believe present experience will assist us in choosing the most promising activities to utilize in other schools to effect improvement. 2. EMPHASIS ON READING AND THE LANGUAGE ARTS Recognizing reading as the basic tool for school success and essential for competent performance in adult life, reading becomes the focal point of cur- riculum effort. Workshops, reading specialists working with classroom teachers, reading centers, reading consultants and supervisors, teachers of speech and drama, a curriculum production center for producing learning materials-all these are receiving attention. 3. REORGANIZATION AND EXPANSION OF BUILDING FACULTIES TO PERMIT TEACHER STRENGTHS TO FUNCTION BETTER The traditional self-contained classroom is being reorganized to permit team teaching, departmentalized teaching, use of teacher aides. Additional sup- portive services such as counselors, social workers, and psychological workers are serving in pilot situations in one elementary school to determine procedures for ultimate effectiveness before introduced in other schools. A model resource center is a PilOt project in a second school. Over 200 additional personnel at various levels have beeii added. 4. INTERPRETATION OF PROGRAMS TO PUBLIC To develop parental and public support in the area served, an individual has been assigned under the District I'ublic Information Director to develop a systematic series of stories and releases and to meet with local groups to assist in building poitive, cooperative attitudes. Classes for parents are being developed and two schools are receiving extra money to develop total community service schools. 5. EVAJUAflON As facets of the District Research and Development Department. four people spend their time testing, evaluating, and interpreting the various special features being developed in Title I schools. Not enough time has elapsed to produce meaningful evaluation results. 8. SIT~IMER SCHOOL To compensate for ordinary learning loss and t 1110111111 Ui 1111(1 iiwrease standards in arithmetic and language arts. an :lttcnhlt. will lie made to enroll at least 75% of eligil)Ie pupils in ha f-day ~u1iinier ~irigrams fir a minimum of 7 weeks. 3~-42- -17 --pt 2--- 2 PAGENO="0018" 840 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 7. INSERVICE EDUCATION A staff that understands the philosophy of compensatory education, the so- ciological conditions and problems, their roles in a newly conceived situation, and the technical aspects of curricular, methodological, and organizational changes is essential to transformation. Workshops and inservice education op- portunities to develop these understandings are prominent during the first year. The Kansas City school system was allocated $1,800,000 in fiscal 1966 to spend in six months and $1,600,000 in fiscal 1967 to spend in twelve months. Recrea- tional, enrichment, and feeding programs developed in 1966 were minimized in 1967 because of better designed efforts to work on basic skills and less money to be spent overall for a longer period of time. To broaden our program to serve more children and to add desirable supportive services, we believe additional funds are needed. We consider Headstart a desira,ble supplement to Title I and I believe it could be more efficiently and more economically administered under Title I. Title III of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (PL 89-10) has provided us with funds to create upon our application a county-wide Diagnostic and Behavorial Enhancement Center as a pilot and a request for operational funds to maintain the Center is now being considered by the U.S. Office. A second grant is providing opportunities to plan for the use of a computer in eighth grade science and mathematics. One or two other activities of an in- novative character are in the application development stage. Our school system, in summary, has benefited from Titles I, II, III, IV, the NDEA Act, the Vocational Act. MDTA, the Higher Education Act, grants from XIMH, PL 874 for the first time last year, the Equal Opportunities Act, and the Civil Rights Act. These acts have enabled us either to seek new directions or to fortify important but costly programs. Especially critical in our judgment is the determination of a method by which appropriations from Congress for certain programs, especially Title I of PL 89-10 can be synchronized with budgeting for a school year to allow time for hiring personnel, securing materials, sound programming, and minimal organi- zational changes within the school year. With respect to the current amendments before the House Committee on Education and Labor, I would particularly commend the amendments to the Vocational Act and changes in the National Teacher Corps. One of the values of the National Teacher Corps is that one of the long-range outcomes should be identification of the direction change in teacher-training programs should take. There is a need to assimilate practical information into present teacher-training programs that equip the new teacher with the distinctive Insights, knowledges and attitudes that will improve instruction for disadvantaged pupils. Hopefully, the colleges and universities who train teachers will soon refuse to consider a graduate to be a fully qualified pro- fessional unless there is adequate development in this area. It seems to be entirely appropriate and reasonable to include the proposed amendment relating to the National Teachers Corps in the Title I Program because of the following reasons: 1. Title I is the major effort attacking problems of the disadvantaged. 2. The provision of the practical part of the training, extremely im- portant for adequate development of a teacher sensitive and responsive to the needs of the disadvantaged, will be facilitated. The development of the intern program should provide needed staff for Title I areas. Funds may be inadequate to support "planning, development and operation" particularly if vocational equipment is to be included. Amendment should facilitate: 1. Meaningful articulation and cooperation between schools and industry. 2. Systematic examination and evaluation of present programs of voca- tional education. 3. Collaboration across school district lines to provide adequate vocational programs for larger areas. 4. Orderly consideration of vocational programs for post high school youth. PAGENO="0019" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 841 We have operated two small work-study programs and are convinced that tills type of activity is necessary for a large number of boys not suited for a standard high school program. Finally, there are many issues which point to a need for comprehensive plan- ning at the state levels. Among them: 1. New means of financing education 2. Programs to improve preparation of teachers 3. State-wide school district reorganization 4. Consideration of extension of the present school term 5. Finding ways to increase the proportion of financial support to edu- cation by the states, including state support for building construction 6. Liberalized voting limitations on tax and bond issues 7. State-wide assessment of the educational effort In regard to the proposed amendment some concerns might be: 1. Rationale that requires 25% of funds to be granted to independent agencies is unclear. Any agency undertaking comprehensive educational planning on a state-wide basis cannot avoid involving state departments. It is almost certain that this will result in additional burdens being imposed upon the state by the activity of the independent agencies. The state de- partments are already over-burdened and under-staffed. The provision seems to be inconsistent with a statement in the Background a 11(1 Need, i.e., "The best planning-that which will be most responsive to the needs of the persons to be served-must be carried out at the state and local levels. 2. The amendment, in addition to achieving its planning aims, ought to recognize the facilitate strengthening state departments of education. This would be consistent with present provisions of Title V. Chairman PERKINS. Thank von very much. Our next witness tins morning will be Dr. Breit, who will 1v~ introduced by Congressman Adams from the ~cve1Itii I)ist riot ui Washington. I might say before Congressman Adams proce~~ that Congressman Adams has not only always tried to improve elementary and second- ary education, but also all forms of education. ~ou may proceed. STATEMENT OF HON. BROOK ADAMS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON Mr. ADAMS. We are very pleased to have our colleague, Mr. Meeds, on this committee, Mr. Chairman. It. has been very helpful to our overall educational problems in the Northwest to have his voice heard here. I appreciate the chairman inviting me over this morning. It is a great pleasure to introduce Mr. Breit this morning. Particularly, I hope that during the course of the questioning you will have an opportunity to explore the title III projects with Mr. Breit. This was something that was a dream that many of us had when we first saw the Seattle Center facilities that were left after the Century 21 Exposition. These, through title III, we think are now providing what may be a model throughout the country where von cami establish an excellent, centralized downtown facility that children from the entire area can come to for an excellence in education, and may begin to provide a breakthrough 111 the stlTggle to try to provide a meaningful education in our central cities. PAGENO="0020" 842 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS I think the testimony this morning from Mr. Breit will demonstrate some of these things. Although the percentage may look small in our racial imbalance, for example, in the city of Seattle, it so happens that from my district in the cemitral area we have high schools where. the percentage of Caucasia.n children, for example, is below 50 percent. Some of our grammar schools are now at. 90-10 percent. So this is a very meaningful thing for them. We hope it. will pro- vide a breakthrough. I am proud to have Superintendent. Breit. here this morning. It is a great pleasure to introduce him to the committee. STATEMENT OF FRED BREIT, DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT, SEATTLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS, SEATTLE, WASH. Mr. BRETT. Thank you, Chairman Perkins and members of the House Education and Labor Committee. Our superintendent of schools, Dr. Forbes Bottomly, was scheduled to attend this hearing, but due to important bills pe.ndin~ at our cur- rent session of the State legislature, is unable to leave ~ea.ttle. He sends his sincere regrets. It. is indeed a pleasure and special privilege to have this opportunity to review the many benefits of Public Law 89-10 to students in the schools serving the city of Seattle and the. Grea.te.r Seattle area. We have a t.hriving city that possesses the ingredients for a promising future. Out of the diversity of our human talent. anti cultural resources, we have the potential for developing a dynamic educational program that could not exist. in less populated areas of the State. A program of this nature would be highly attractive to parents and would tend to re(luce migration of families to the suburbs. With the financial assistance of Federal funds, we are now in a posi- Hon to move into new and broader dimensions of educational plan- ning that include nongraded programs, cont.inuous progress concepts, team teaching, flexible scheduling, and the employment of computer- assisted instruction. In order t.o accomplish these objectives, mobility of students will be essentia.l with transportation provided for those who need it. At the present time, we do not provide transportation and parents are required to carry the burden of this expense. Even though we have an excellent, school system in the city of Seattle with strong community support, we do not possess the funds needed to take giant strides toward truly imaginative programs. This is evi- denced by t.he fact that during the past. 14 months the Seattle School District, has found it necessary to present five levy and bond issues to t.he voters in order to secure maintenance and capital outlay fimds to meet the regular ongoing financial requirements of the school district. Through the availability of title I funds, approximately $1,500.000 for 1966-67, the Seattle School District has worked with citizen ad- visory groups and local Office of Economic Opportunity representa- PAGENO="0021" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 843 tives in developing additional educational services to meet the special needs of students who come from low-income families. Students in this category have such limited cultural backgrounds and great deprivation that only through massive effort. can educators hope to remedy some of these shortcomings. Federal funds have en- abled the Seattle schools to accelerate their efforts in this direction. We have reduced class size, provided teacher aids, counselors, nurses, and social workers, purchased special materials and equipment, de- veloped new teaching materials, revitalized classroom procedures and arranged for intensive inservice training for teachers. Along with this, we have utilized the services of 1.700 community volunteers who provide special tutoring for our students. A notable example of our special title I effort was the 1966 summe.r school program for 3,000 disadvantaged students. Title I funds pro- vided improvement classes in mathematics and reading, enrichment classes, and outdoor education. We had a ratio of one adult to every five students and provided a wide range of field trip experiences. In cooperation with three institutions of higher learning, teachers spent the afternoons developing new teaching materials and pro- cedures for disadvantaged students. An important part of this entire procedure was the emergence of a better understanding of these pupils and their special needs by the entire teaching staff. Through this summer program, students not only were give.n a vital educational experience but. also were removed, in many cases, from an aimless summer of wandering the streets. A number of our schools that meet, the requirements for title I funds are overcrowded de facto schools in the central area of the city. To help alleviate this overcrowdedness and to provide a better educational environment., Federal funds are being used to transport many of these students to other schools in the district where space is available and facilities are now overcrowded. Another outstanding example of the value of Federal funds is the title III program developed by the Seattle public schools in coopera- t.ion with school districts in four adjoining counties. The program known as the "Puget Sound Arts and Sciences Center Project" is lo- cated at the Seattle Center on theformer World's Fair Century 21 grounds. This project housed in outstanding facilities provided by the city of Seattle could easily serve as a prototype for comparable programs across the Nation. The basic objective of t.he project, as developed in cooperation with n citizens' advisory committee, is to use the Seattle Center as a focal point for mobilizing all available community talents in the arts and sciences that can supplement and give new directions to the existing educational programs in Seattle area schools. A conscientious effort is being made to include students from all socioeconomic groups and racial backgrounds. Performances within individual school districts or in the unique facilities of the Seattle Center include professional repertory theater, PAGENO="0022" 844 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS children's theater, symphony orchestra concerts, grand opera, chamber opera. small ensembles, music coaching, and in-class dramatic read- ings. These performances range from intimate groups to string trios and bass quartets playing for elementary pupils, to the challenge of opera presented in the superb setting of the opera house. Approximately 200,000 students from 29 school districts enjoyed the various presentations of the performing arts program during the past year. As a source of new ideas for curiculum revision and the improve- rnent of instructional procedures, many workshops and demonstra- tions utilizing professional talent were arranged for 300 participating teachers. The mathematics and science components of the title TI program are designed to bring to students and teachers the newest materials, instructional procedures, and theories of learning that have been de- veloped by distinguished national educators, including Jerome Bruner, Benjamin Bloom. David Riesman, Richard Suchman, and Jerrold Zaharias. Demonstration classrooms and model laboratories are ~ivailable at the Pacific. Science Center for use by teachers and students. During the past year approximately 40,000 students took part in the activities scheduled at the center. Staff members of the Seattle public schools, other participating school districts, and nonpublic schools in the Seattle area are most grateful for the financial support provided by the Federal Govern- ment. in meeting the exceptional needs of our young people. Staff members have utilized these funds without Federal control and wit.h a maximum opportunity to develop innovative programs to serve local needs. In regard to the amendments that have been proposed, we are not as a school system actively involved in all of the amendment proposals. However, we have reviewed them and feel they are all good proposals and we endorse them. (Mr. Breit's additional statement follows:) Row CAN PUnLIC LAW 89-10 BE IMPROVED? Authorize funds so school districts can plan programs and secure personnel in ample time for the school year-September to June. In order `to secure qualified personnel, school districts must hire teachers during the early spring months. This cannot take place if funds are not authorized until late summer or early fall. Include the funding of the Head Start Prograni in P.L. 89-10 so the program can become an integral part of the school district operation and under s~h~o1 district direction. Include funds for massive summer school programs in the large cities. It is essential that we provide a broad program of activities including improvement and enrichment classes, outdoor education, field trips, and physical education during the summer months for our young people. Provide federal funds for school districts that are planning new and bold patterns of organization such as educational parks and continuous progress cen- ters that hold promise for outstanding educational programs geared to student needs for the future. Centers of this nature would embody the best teaching methods, materials and equipment. and would provide an opportunity for students of all races to work together. There would be no de facto centers. PAGENO="0023" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 845 SUMMARY-SEArrLE SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 1 AS RELATED TO PuBLIc LAW 89-10 Profile of Seattle School District No. 1, King County, Wash. A. Number of Public Schools in District 117 Public School Enrollment (K-12) 95, 9(30 Non-Public School Enrollment 17, 379 Total 113, 339 City Population (latest estimate) 574, 000 92%-Caucasian 8%-Non Caucasian Total School District Personnel: Teacheru 3,589 Teacher-Aides (including Title I & Head Start) 100 Other 2, 656 Total 6, 345 B. Federally-funded programs: 1966-67 Title I (PL 89-10) (anticipated) $1,529,533 Title II (PL 89-10) 175,380 Title III (PL 89-10) 426. 814 Handicapped Youth Training (PL 87-415) 122, 664 Neighborhood Youth Corps (PL 88-452) 250, 870 Public Law 81-874 610, 000 Head Start (PL 88-452) 630,276 NDEA, Title III (PL 85-864) 330,000 NDEA, Title V 39. 302 Federal Forest Funds (est.) 45. 000 School Lunch Reimbursement ___ 171. 000 School Milk Reimbursement 133. 000 Total 4. 463, 839 C. Total Budgeted Expenditure Chargeable to Fiscal Year 64, 195, 240 TITLE I-ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT OF 1965, P~niic LAW 89-10, 1966 FISCAL YEAR, JANUARY 4, 1966 TO AUGUST 20, 1966 ALLOCATION $1,662,536 NUMBER OF CHILDREN SERVED Disadvantaged Children, 11,513. AIMS OR OBJECTIVES To improve skills in reading. arithmetic and other academic areas. To pro- vide experimental backgrounds that will motivate learning to provide educa- tionally deprived children with heightened aspiration and motivation to realize their potential capabilities and to initiate self-improvement. To help acquaint teachers with the background and problems of the education- ally deprived children. GENERAL STATEMENT OF SERVICES PROVIDED The major emphasis of the educational services provided under Title I was in the elementary schools located in the areas of the city most highly characterized by low-income status and cultural deprivation. We sought to identify the special needs of the disadvantaged puidl and to correct them with priority fixed at the primary and intermediate grades. PAGENO="0024" 846 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Special services provided were: Teaching and Tutoring Transportation Nutritional Services Medical Services Counseling and Guidance Dental Services Staff Training Attendance Services After-School Programs Parent Involvement Community Involvement SIGNIFICANT RESULTS The development of remedial programs and basic skills. The designing of programs using the services of para-professionals and vol. unteers. The development of curriculum materials emphasizing the special needs of the culturally-deprived child. The unique guidance and counseling plans. The improvement of school-community relations and reorganization of the school day and school year. The iniplementation of pre-service and in-service teacher training programs. Planning for correcting racially-imbalanced schools. The experience of learning how to work for the mentally retarded. The provision for diagnostic and remedial and psychological services. The identification and correction of health deficiencies among low-income children. An opportunity and encouragement for recent dropouts to return to a pursuit of their formal education through a re-entry program. A breakfast program (paid and/or free) for children not receiving a break- fast at honie. Field trips for cultural enrichment. Coordination with other federally-funded projects (OEO, Titles II and III). TEACHING STAFF Teachers. 76: Substitutes, 60: Teacher Aides, 46. Pupil-teacher ratio: Prior to Title I Project, 24-27; in the Title I Project, 20-24. TITI~ I-ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT OF 1965, PUBLIC LAW 59-10. 1966 FISCAL YEAR, SUMMER PROGRAMS AMOUNT OF ALLOCATION SPENT FOR SUMMER PROGRAMS, $405,272 NUMBER OF CHILDREN SERVED Disadvantaged Children, 2,050. AIMS OR OBJECTIVES To improve the academic achievement, attitude, and experience background of the participating students through an innovative instructional program. To provide classroom teaching experience to teachers who will be assigned in the Fall of 1966 to teaching the educationally deprived. To provide classroom teaching experience for undergraduate education students. To provide an opportunity for skilled and experienced teachers to study, evaluate, recommend, and prepare curriculum materials suitable for teaching disadvantaged children. GENERAL STATEMENT OF SERVICES PROVIDED The services provided were those which would lend to the aims and objectives of the summer programs (see above). The services were: Teaching Field Trips Outdoor Education Experiences Teacher Training Curriculum Study PAGENO="0025" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 847 SIGNIFICANT RESULTS Effective remedial instruction because of small sizes of classes. An opportunity for the interns to work closer with the students. An opportunity to expose teachers to the culturally-deprived children. Teachers were afforded a better insight on handling the culturally-deprived. child and his problems. Timn I-ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT OF 1965, PUBLIC LAW 89-10, 1967 FIscAR YEAR, SEPTEMBER 6, 1966 TO JUNE 9, 1967 ALLOCATION, $1,413,156 (This amount may be adjusted.) NUMBER OF CHILDREN SERVED Disadvantaged Children, 9,295. AIMS OR OBJECTIVES Design, develop and use curriculum materials and methods especially suited. for the educationally disadvantaged child. Design and use methods and materials suited for arrested language and per- ceptional development. Reduce the rate and severity of disciplinary problems. To increase the quality of instruction and the quality of learning so as to improve performance as measured by standard achievements tests and/or intelli- gence tests. GENERAL STATEMENT OF SERVICES PROVIDED Additional Counselors-Secondary. Basic skills instruction provided to the potential `drop-out"-Secondary. Reentry Program for suspended student-instruction in basic skills-Secondary. Theme-Reader Program-teacher can increase the quantity and quality of student compositions by having someone else read and correct them-Secondary. Breakfast Program-to reduce poor scholastic attainment traced to hunger- Secondary. Teacher Aides-help for classroom teacher-Secondary, Elementary, Non- Public. Field Trips to increase experiences-Secondary, Elementary. Accenting basic skills learning, priority given to reading-Elementary. Smaller classes, consequently more individual attention-Elementary. Procedures developed to modify subcultural communication habits that inhibit learning-Elementary. Diagnostic-Remediation services to children with learning disabilities, special program for each child-Elementary, Secondary. Curriculum Development of new programs, materials and services especially suited for the disadvantaged child, emphasis placed upon programs and mate- rials for improving self-image and developing basic language skills-Elementary, Secondary. Work Experience Programs-a program of training and evaluation with com- pensation for the mentally retarded students, aims to discover the work poten- tial of the mentally retarded student and develop this potential and provide actual work exposure in industry as a means to successful work experience. Health Services~-4 additional nurses and a one-half-time medical director give the additional time needed for discovering and following-up on health prob- lems of disadvantaged children-Secondary, Elementary. A workshop for 30 teachers to improve their ability to deal more effectively with intergroup education problems. Speech Therapist and Reading Program-Non Public. Community Liaison Coordinator and Volunteer Services Coordinator. Planning and Research area to prepare statistical information for the project. Social Work Ser~-ices to follow-up and work with children who were former Head Start Enrollees-Elementary. If enough money is available, the summer programs (Summer School, Summer Writing, Summer Reading and Summer Recreation) will be provided. PAGENO="0026" 848 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION A~NDMENTS COST OF SERVICES PROVIDED Percent Salaries-Teachers, counselors, substitute teachers, other educational 54 Salaries-Supervisory, technical, professional, medical 10 Salaries-Secretarial, staff and unskilled 9 Employee benefits and staff travel 5 Books, supplies, and materials 2 Telephone, alterations, repairs, and new equipment 1 Student wages and fringe benefits 1 Professional personal, and contractual services 4 Pupil transportation and field trips 7 Rental of buildings 3 Overhead costs 4 Total 100 TITLE 11-ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION Acr OF 1965, PuBLIC LAw 89-10 ALLOCATION Fiscal 1966, $158,208. Fiscal 1967, $175,340 (to be adjusted). NUMBER OF BOOKS PROVIDED Fiscal 1966: Special Reference Books, 2,900. Library Books, 22,800. Encyclopedias, 185 sets. Audio Visual Materials. Fiscal 1967: Data is not available at this time. AIMS OR OBJECTIVES Expand and improve the present book collections to meet state standards. Increase the range and reading levels of materials to meet the non-graded programs. Provide more listening materials to aid in vocabulary building and the improve- ment of listening skills at the elementary level. The secondary level needs enrichment records and tapes in language arts, social studies and foreign language. Provide a small professional periodical collection for teachers. Continue to decentralize the record and filmstrip collection of the present audio- visual center so that these materials are more readily available in schools. Provide periodicals on microfilm in secondary schools so that periodicals may he available over a longer period of time. Present storage is inadequate. SIGNIFICANT RESULTS, FISCAL 1966 The secondary schools received an allocation of 80~ per pupil. In the elemen- tary schools. priority groups w-ere established with: Priority I receiving $2.50 per pupil; Priority II receiving $1.50 per pupil; and Priority III receiving $1.25 per pupi.l. The average per pupil expenditure wa,s $1.45. It was hoped that the plan of allotment would help to minimize the differences between large and small elementary schools. It almost doubled the book budget for small- and medium-sized schools, and it also made possible the purchase of some expensive reference books in these schools. Differences have not been completely minimized. TITLE III-ELEMENTAr.Y ~\ND ~CONDARY EJmcATION ACT OF 1965, PUBLIC LAW ~9--10, 111)07 FISCAL YEAR ALLOCATION Performing Arts. ~31~l .7-IT. Administration & ()peration Expenses, $50,000. NTMBER OF CHILDREN To BE SERVED ~-1~.0(~) Children. PAGENO="0027" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 849 AIMS OR OBJECTIVES The use of specially talented persons, including artists, musicians, and scien- tists, to supplement the basic educational process. The educational use of the unique physical facilities available at the Seattle Center complex. The development of new educational approaches to the humanities, emphasiz- ing their relationship one to the other. The provision of opportunities for children of all socio-economic and racial backgrounds to have significant contact with professionals in the arts and sciences and with one another. The provision of exemplary educational programs and services to supplement the regular school program. The continued development of in-service education programs for teachers, utilizing the special talents of professionals and the facilities of the Arts and Sciences Center. GENERAL STATEMENT OF SERVICES PROVIDED An opportunity for students to enjoy professional artistic performances in theatre, opera, symphony, and ensembles (music, drama, dance, etc.). An opportunity to utilize individual professional talents (coaches in music and drama, guest artists, conductors, and consultants). An opportunity for students to expeirence intimate personal contacts with per- formers and intimate looks into the inner-workings of a wide variety of highly professional artists. An opportunity (through advance-preparation materials) for home involve- ment to help stimulate an interest in the performing arts before attending performances. An opportunity to conduct workshops and demonstration programs for both students and teachers in arts and sciences. An opportunity to develop instructional materials in the sciences especially. SIGNIFICANT RESULTS An awakening of the culturally-deprived childern to the sciences, mathematics, and the performing arts. Stimulation of interest in and appreciation of the performing arts on the parts of the students, the teachers, and the parents. A definite effect not only on teaching ability and methods employed by teachers but a stimulate to the receptiveness of the students toward learning. Marked improvements in students' technical ability. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much for a very pointed state- ment. We certainly appreciate your appearance here today. We will postpone any questioning until we have heard from all the witnesses. Our next witness will be introduced by one of our senior Members in Congress, Congressman Brademas, from the State of Indiana, who has done, throughout the years, a marvelous job in the field of educa- tion at all levels. Congressman Brademas. Mr. BRADEMAS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I am very pleased to welcome to the committee today the superin- tendent. of schools and the head of the Community School Corp. in South Bend, md., Dr. Charles Ilolt, who has been, for a. number of months, our school superintendent in South Bend, and who has in his time there already shown himnsel f to be a. man of very great courage and of very great ability. I think he is one of the best school superintendents in the country. However, I may be somewhat prejudiced. I am very pleased to welcome you here today, Dr. bIt, as I know my colleagues are. PAGENO="0028" 850 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS STATEMENT OF CHARLES HOLT, SU ERINTEI~DEI~T OF SCHOOLS,. SOUTH BEND, flu). Mr. HOLT. Thank you, Mr. Brademas. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I should like to pref- ace my statement by saving that first of all South Bend is a com- munity that has recently returned from a very economically depressed~ condition. Our assessed valuation tax base is not growing. There- fore, we were in no position to proceed in any logical manner in help- ing our disadvantaged children, particularly. Title I and title II have meant. a great deal to our corporation, to the district. We have now 13 title I schools, for example, out of the 49 schools in the district. This has allowed us to bring in 13 instruc- tional resource teachers to act as consultants and help the regular classroom teachers, 13 instructional aides. We brought in counselors,. psychologists. We brought in testing specialists, nurses, fine arts teachers, four special education teachers, a speech therapist and a librarian. We have at this point., we. think, accomplished a great deal for these children. We are at this point on our own. We are sitting clown and taking a long look at what we. have, done. We don't. propose to pro- ceed without some logical planning at this point and review, evaluate where we have been. however, these are programs that would not otherwise have hap- pcne(l in south Bend. They have meant much in terms of materials. Our title II library construction materials has brought about a great strengthening of our programs.. \Ve still have 12 schools without libraries in the corporation. We are working on that. It has meant, too. Mr. Chairman. very much in terms of a coopera- tive program with the private schools, of which there are many. I think we have learned much from them. I think we have been helpful to their programs. These programs have (lone another thing: They have stimulated the community. One of the. interesting things is even in the so-called areas of higher socioeconomic groups, they are now interested. They have asked a. principal or two from the goTd coast section, so-called, to go into these schools, and it is a different, kind of experience. Without exception, they have been inspired in doing the job. I t.hink it. has meant a great deal to the community's acceptance of' a commitment to aid in disadvantaged children programs. I think this is one of the real benefits of the program, in addition to the financial nourishment, of course., that has come about.. I should like at this point, to address my remarks to the amendments which we have studied. The CHAIRMAN. You may proceed. Mr. HOLT. First of all, we are committed in South Bend at this point with the National Teacher Corps. One of the most difficult things in t.hese 13 schools of which I spoke. is the recruitment of staff~ as you have doubtless heard many times. The experienced, competent teacher with seniority has said, by and large, ~I don't. want. to go to these schools," which means there is a disproportionate number of inexperienced teache.rs. Even these teachers often leave after a year. I thing this is changing now. PAGENO="0029" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 851 But I see the Teacher Corps as an oppothmity to bring in people specifically trained t.o deal with these youngsters. Without this pro- gram, it means this to us: that we will have to bring in in the summer, prior to the opening of school, a. workshop program of one to two weeks at most to try our best to equip these teachers to know the prob- lems of disadvantaged children. With the interns, the use of experienced teachers in this program, it will assist us materially and will bring about perhaps more com- mitment on the part of the other teachers, as they see the young teach- ers, the interns, the experienced teachers work with these children. What I am saying is, I think this is the way to provide the ex- perienced teacher for disadvantaged children. The problem of recruiting is a very discouraging thing. I notice that the Teacher Corps in the first year, their success, at the national level has been most encouraging. It has been most discouraging for us. I thing this comes about perhaps because of a national commitment, a desire for public service that these people exhibit. So we would be wholeheartedly in favor of the Teacher Corps. We would hope fervently that members of this Corps would come to South Bend to assist us with our programs. Next, Mr. Chairman, in vocational education, I don't think up to this point we have done the best kind of job in the area of vocational education. I think we are still dealing in another era. I don't think we are up to the point in developing, what I would call immediately negotiable skills on the part of youngsters who go through the sec- ondary school. I think we have to equip them for jobs immediately upon leaving our schools. With the number of these youths who will come to the labor market, I think it is imperative that we begin to develop our programs in a better style. For example, our part-time work-study programs, I think, have been unrealistic. One of the reasons they have been un- realistic is the lack of communication in most districts with the business community and industry. Sure, we communicate, but. not well enough. This amendment might bring about this kind of change in helping us communicate with them. We certainly need to stimulate innovation because we are still, I am afraid, in a bird box building program in most of the schools. We need innovative programs. We need to go into data processing. We have recently taken a survey of our area and have found what skills are needed to equip these youngsters. But this is a program under the auspices of the Vocational Technical College of the State of Indiana that is primarily for dropouts, for young adults. The program still must be, prior to this, in the secondary school. We still have that problem, which we must somehow stimulate. We would wholeheartedly endorse this. It is an abso1ute~ essential in our community, which is an industrial community, that we have an improved vocational program. One that is very dear to my heart is the program for handicapped chikiren. Today we have sitting in the classrooms of the distric.t of South Bend a minimum of 251) youngsters of the educable category who are sitting in classrooms because we e~in't Supply teachers, we can't supply facilities, to house them in classes where they could be most effectively trained. We have them Sittmllg in classrooms be- PAGENO="0030" 852 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS ing frustrated, frustrating other children, frustrating a teacher ill equipped to do the kind of a job that ought to be done for them. I would wholeheartedly endorse the recruitment. aspect of this pro- gram for handicapped children. I would further endorse the idea that we have centers set up in the various parts of the country where there could be analysis of the needs made for these children and pro- grams developed. I would say, too, Mr. Chairman, that one of the real needs would be new programs. For example, we have deaf, mentally retarded chil- dren. We don't know a thing about how to deal with deaf mentally retarded children today. We don't even know where to approach it. I think this program and these centers would allow us to have some high-quality research that would give us new approaches, new ways to train these children. So while there are few higher institutions, relatively speaking, that are working in this area there are some be~innin~. For example, in our city, the College of St. Mary, I think, is mak- ing a remarkable start in the training of teachers for handicapped children. They have a basic commitment to this, and we are very happy with the progress they are making. I would like to see help furnished in this program. because we are far behind, in our district and, I think, other districts, where we ought to be at this point with these children. I think we will pay for it a.nd pay for it dearly later. Thank you, sir. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much, Dr. Holt. Our next witness is I)r. Stapleton, assistant superintendent of schools, Albuquerque, N. Mex. STATI~MENT OF ERNEST STAPLETON, ASSISTANT SUPERINTEND- ENT OF SCHOOLS, ALBUQTJTERQITE, N. HEX. Mr. STAPLETON. Mr. Chairman and committee members, I am Ernest Stapleton, assistant superintendent of schools for instruction in the Albuquerque public schools. I regre.t that T)r. Chishoirn was unable to be here due to an emer- gency in Santa Fe at the State legislature and other matters pending in the city schools. It is an honor for us to be here and we appreciate the opportunity to present part of what we are doing in the Albuquerque School Dis- trict with regard to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. I would like to say that the report which you have, which has been presented to Dr. Chisholm, is a fine document and we would like to have it entered into the record. Chairman PERKINS. Without objection, it is so ordered. (The report follows:) PROGRAMS DEVELOPED UNDER TUE ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT OF 1965, ALBUQUERQUE, N. MEX. (A Report to Dr. Robert L. Chishoim, Superintendent, Albuquerque Public Schools from: Office of New Programs, Albuquerque Public Schools, March 1967) PROJECTS DEVELOPED UNDER TITLE I, ESEA INTRODUCTION Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Act of 1965 (E.S.E.A.) provides the Albuquerque Public Schools with the opportunity to meet some of the problems PAGENO="0031" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 853 attendant upon poverty in a city which has doubled in school population in the last decade. While the Albuquerque Public School System takes pride in its total educational program during this period of intense growth pressures, it recogni2es in Title I the opportunity to effect a significant strengthening of programs which, in the words of the Act, "contribute particularly to meeting the special educational needs of educationally deprived children." Recognizing the unique effects of educational deprivation, the Albuquerque Public Schools have planned and developed programs under Title I designed to meet the needs of children handicapped by such deprivation. In general, the programs are intended to broaden significantly the experimental base of dis- advantaged youth, provide more intensive training in academic skills, widen per- ceptions of disadvantaged youth in their life-views and interpretations of society, and heighten aspirations toward productive economic and social functioning in society. There has been wide participation of school personnel in planning programs and projects. Programs have been correlated with community action programs be- gun under the Economic Opportunity Act of 1904. The non-public schools serving significant numbers of deprived youth have been involved in the planning and implementation of projects. A continuing working relationship has been estab- lished with the parochial school community in the development of special educa- tional services not normally provided the private school pupils. In the development of plans to enhance the educational programs of the educationally deprived children of the community, it may be said that a common objective has been to facilitate access to the opportunities of our society. A theme present in the planning and development of projects and proposals may be found in the words of Ruth Benedict: "In reality, society and the individual are not antagonists. His culture pro- vides the raw material of which the individual makes his life. If it is meagre, the individual suffers; if it is rich, the individual has the chance to rise to his opportunity." Planning The day following the signing into law of the Elementary and Secondary Eduncation Act of 1965 by President Johnson on April 11, 1905, a project planning committee was appointed by the superintendent of the Albuquerque Public Schools. The committee was comprised of teachers, principals, and representatives of the various disciplines within the divisions of instruction and pupil personnel services. By early summer, the committee had developed a tentative structuring of projects to be recommended under Title I. The joint American Association of School Administrators-U.S. Office of Educa- tion meeting on E.S.E~A. in May 1965 provided valuable preliminary guidelines in the preparation of Title I programs. The New Mexico State Department of Education held regional workshops in the late spring and a state-wide work- shop in July 1965, focusing upon interpretations of the various innovative features of E.S.E.A. and the designing of projects. These meetings and local planning sessions during the summer of 1965 helped to provide the capability of moving into funding and implementation of projects within a month follow- ing the receipt of final instructions from the State Department of Education in October 1965. By January of 1966 many components of the Albuquerque Title I Program were in operation. Difficulties occurred, however, in the recruitment of personnel for the specialized educational and service areas that had been established or strengthened by the program. A change in emphasis was made, therefore, which provided for strengthening in-service programs for teachers (public and private), the establishing of curriculum study committees with emphasis upon the special needs of disadvantaged youth. and the development of summer programs. During this period, a schedule of meetings was established which provides for continued joint planning with the Albuquerque Economic Opportunity Board established under P.L. 88-164. The most immediate educational areas re- quiring coordination were the Bead Start, and Neighborhood Youth Corps pro- jects. With the development of neighborhood service centers under the com- munity action program, other areas of mutual concern have emerged, providing the opportunity for cooperative action between the Board of Education and the Economic Opportunity Board in the areas of family counseling, tutoring, and early childhood development programs. PAGENO="0032" 854 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Implementation, 1966-67 Full-scale implementation of the Title I Program was possible with the begin- ning of school in September 1966. The various components of the program are summarized in the following passages: A. Counseling-A team of eight specialists in guidance counseling has been assigned to strengthen guidance services at the public and private elementary schools in the project area. Emphasis has been placed upon consultation with principals and the development of faculty in-service programs aimed toward assisting school personnel and parents in relating effectively to pupils in need of counseling. An effort is made to acquaint faculties and parents with the various referral services available in the community. Professional school libraries have been supplemented by recent reference materials in the field of counseling and mental health. Thirty-four public and private schools in the project area are presently served by this project. The project is coordinated within the Albu- querque Public School Division of Pupil Personnel Services. B. Librariens.-While there have been concerned efforts to provide elementary libraries in the Albuquerque schools, the accelerated growth pattern of the last two decades has militated against achieving the desired level of funding of library programs. Title I has provided the capability of strengthening libraries, which in turn strengthen the total reading programs, at twelve schools serving heavy (4flicefltratiflfls of disadvantaged youth. I.ibrary programs at four secondary schools have been strengthened by the assignment of additional librarians and the purchase of additional library books and reference materials. Renovation made possible by Title I funding has provided library space at nine ~(hiOOlS in the project area. (~. Junior Hiqh School E.rperience Enrichrnent.--In order to overcome the harriers erected by the limiting effects of poverty, the staff of a junior high sihi ~ol serving ~i extremely heavy concentration of disadvantaged youth has inmiemented a cultural enrichment program. The project involves the following bade features: (a the centering of reading, writing, speaking and computational mtivitics of the classroom around material gathered first hand from frequent educational field trips in the community: and. (h) the deliberate exposure of students to various cultural activities of the community such as concerts, dramas, and art exhibits. As a corollars- ti the student activities, a teacher in-service program has been instituted, bringing leading local and regional scholars to the school and Iwo- viding released time for teacher workshops in the field of teaching disadvantaged youth. Since the implementation of this project, the concept of experience enrich- ment has been adapted to the projects of other schools. Title I funds are making po~sihle a general increase of field trip activities for all schools in the project area. T). Pcrsonqlizc(1 Curriculum-At a hirh school in the project area, a team of four teachers and a counselor work closely with anproximately eighty disad- vantoged students. A student is recommended for this program if he exhibits disorientation to the regular curriculum, or the symptoms which characterize the potential dropout. The personalized curriculum team concentrates on the need for increasing pupil motivation and self-direction, while working to improve pupil achievement in basic skills. Vocational and consumer education are inte- gral features of the program. P. Learvivq .l!otcrials Centers-At two high schools, learning materials cen- ters have been established. Audio visual equipment. accessories, and recently developed reading and computational materials are centered in the schools in locations easily accessible to teachers. At one of the schools, the center is oper- ated in conjunction with the library. The room facilities which comprise the centers were made possible by reno~-ation and construction funds provided under Title I. At each center a teacher-coordinator is assigned to provide direction to the progrim and serve as a resource specialist in the field of visual aids and school- made learning materials. A corollary to the materials center pro~ram is the provision of ndidtional field trips to provide pupils and teachers first-hand experi- ences upon which follow-up lessons usinr school-made reading and computational materials are based. Center activities also include special home economics classes involving the purchasing and renovating of clothing. Activities in con- sumer economics are also coordinated through the learning materials centers. PAGENO="0033" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 855 Many new items of audio-visual and reproducing equipment used in the development of teacher-made learning materials are circulated from the centers. The opportunity to tailor teaching materials to the needs of individual students has been enhanced greatly by the development of the learning centers. The learn- lug centers coordinators have organized teacher in-service sessions ranging from the use of new educational equipment to the teaching of reading to hi-lingual children. The learning materials centers appear to have provided a valuable and immediate benefit to teachers and pupils. - F. Classroom Instruction Improrcment Project in Cooperation with the Lni- rersity of Sew Mejieo.-This project activity addresses itself to the matter of modifying classroom instruction to include the newest teaching methods and materials. The major objective of the project is the reduction of the normal lag between the development of promising innovations and the adaptation of those innovations to classroom practice. The project involves twenty teachers, each of whom is assigned a student teacher. With tuition funded under Title I, the teachers are enrolled in a university course designed to acquaint them with recent research relating to improvement of classroom instruction and the devel- opment of teaching methods correlated with the research. The student teachers take a course in general methods and student teaching. Consultants are used iii the project to present recent methodology pertaining to teaching disadvantaged youth in the areas of reading, study skills, social studies, and communications skills. G. Albuquerque Tutorial Project.-The Albuquerque Public School tutorIal program was begun on a volunteer basis in the fall of 19(4. At that time a small group of college students, working with the principals of several elementary schools serving disadvantaged youth, established a schedule wherein they fur- iiished regular tutoring to school youth several times weekly. In the fall of 1965. application for funding to provide for expansion of the project was made through the Albuquerque Economic Opportunity Board by the pul)lic school system. A grant from the Office of Economic Opportunity financed the project from Decem- her 1965 to December 1966, at which time funding was brought under Title I. At the present time approximately four hundred pupils in five elementary and two junior high schools in the project area are provided regular tutoring in read- ing and arithmetic by some four hundred volunteer tutors. Tutors are drawn from the city high schools, the local colleges, and various adult groups sponsored by churches and service organizations. Title I funding provides for coordina- tion of the project, remuneration of project aides recruited from the neighbor- hoods served, and transportation costs. H. ~pccial &~rrices.-In the area of special services, Title I funding has made possible the following expansion: (a) The assignment of eleven nurses to serve the public and private schools in the project area. (h) The establishment of nine special education classes for educable retarded children and one class for trainable children in cooperation with the local community association for retarded children. (c) The employment of four professional speech therapists to serve public and private schools in the project area. Id) The funding of in-service programs utilizing local and national leaders in the fields of counseling and special services. I. Reading Programs-Recognizing that a firm foundation in reading skill is vital to education, a concerted effort has been made to strengthen reading pro- grams in the project area. Several reading teachers have been employed to serve schools exhibiting a high incidence of reading problems. These teachers l)rovide assistance in read- ing programs to all the staff mneii~bers of the schools to which they are assigned arl(l work with individual students on a referral basis. Projects focusing 119011 the rea(hin~t needs of hi-lingual and Indian Children have been illlj)leliIelIte(1. Au eleuueiit~i iy rca (Ii hg c iisulta lit euiiph )ye(l thiri ugh Ti the I fri uidi jig sel.vi's the elementary public and private schools in the project area through teacher i li-service i rograming. (lelliOllstra tin lessons. 011(1 (i)11sl11t~I t i in w-i th hiil lvi (11101 teachers. Elementary specialists in art and music integrate their talents into the reading 011(1 language arts programs, serving p111)1k and private selloils in (lie project a rca through in-service programs and consul tantship. The assignment of additional teachers to eleiiienitarv classroonis ha ~ Provided re(hllcti) in of ha ss sizes in the project a rca to a lii ~ fir gr a tcr i rid i vidna 1 at tori- PAGENO="0034" 856 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS ion to pupil needs. The assignment of additional teachers at the secondary level has also achieved reduction in class sizes, with particular emphasis placed upon strengthening of pupil language and computational skills. J. Head ~tart.-During the summer of 1965, the Albuquerque Public Schools sponsored a Head Start program funded from the Office of Economic Opportu- nity. The initial proje~t Irovided an eight-week child development and pre- school program for 1200 children prior to their entry into first grade. The pro- gram offered the full range of educational, health, counseling, and parent educa- tion services recommended by the Office of Economic Opportunity. An expanded Head Start project was implemented in the summer of 1966 accommodating approximately 2100 children for an eight-week period. Funding for the project was provided through both the Office of Economic Opportunity and Title I. Again, a comprehensive range of educational and supplemental family services in the areas of health and counseling was provided. K. Program Ecaluation.-In the summer of 1966 an office of program evalua- tion was established and a research psychologist employed to implement sci- entific research techniques in the evaluation of new programs. A variety of methodology, ranging from statistical techniques to the systematized eliciting of parental and teacher responses, is being employed in the assessment process. Tile most recent educational measurement devices aiid data processing facilities are being used to produce a valid and precise reading of the effects of the new programs upon students. The data required for a full-scale assessment of the past year~s operation of the Title I program are not yet available. Such data will soon be available, however, due to the testing and measurements that have been implemented through the office of program evaluation. Exhibits A. through D of this report provide examples of the techniques being employed to evaluate the Title I program. TITLE lI-SCHOOL LIBRARY RESOURCES. TEXTBOOKS, AND OTHER INsTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS Despite intensive growth pressures resulting in the need for many additional classrooms every year. the Albuquerque Public Schools have been able to make some progress in expansion of library programs. Title II, E.S.E.A., has provided a most needed opportunity to accelerate local expansion of school libraries. particular at the elementary level. As noted earlier, library programing is a significant component of Title I program. Title II has proved to be a most beneficial and logical corollary to Title I in the over-all E.S.E.A. Albuquerque program. Schools not included in the Title I program have also benefitted froni Title II in the supplementing of school library programs. Experimental and innovative library programs have been accelerated by Title II funds. In three areas of the city. school libraries are serving as community resources by pro- viding evening and summer library programs.' During t.he 1965-66 school year, a total of $137.859.0O was allocated to Albu- (luer(ll~e under the New Mexico Title II State Plan. For the 1966-67 school year, a total of $122,646.00 has been allocated, with an additional allocation expected in the spring. TITLE 111-SUPPLEMENTARY EDUCATIONAL CENTERS AND S~vIcEs Albuquerque has received several grants under Title III of E.S.E.A. for the purpose of planning and operating projects new to the New Mexico educational and cultural scene. Planning of the projects has involved a wide range of local and state cultural and educational resources. The various new programs made possible through Title III are summarized in the following passages: A. OUTDOOR EDUCATION CENTER In April 1966 work was begun under a Title III grant to plan an outdoor edu- cation center to be located at a 130 acre site owned by the Albuquerque Public Schools in the Sandia Mountain range, twenty miles from Albuquerque. In Janu- ary 1967 the aJ)plication for an operational grant to implement programing at the center was approved by the F. S. Office of Education. 1 Sandoval Elementary School. northwest Albuquerque: Emerson Elementary School. southeast Albuquerque: Kit Carson-Ernie Pyle Joint Library. southwest Albuquerque (program to be Initiated, sprIng, 1967). PAGENO="0035" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDT~TCATION AMENDMENTS 857 In operation, the center is providing the opportunity to use outdoor sitnatioi.s and materials as vehicles for teaching natural sciences, arts and crafts, music, physical education and language arts. The project is coordinated within the Albuquerque Public Schools I)ivision of I tistruction. B. ALBUQUERQTJE YOUTH SYMPhONY The Youth Symphony Project, approved under Title III in September 1966, provides for the expansion of the existing Albuquerque Youth Symphony to ac- (`ommodate more talented young people, the expansion of a tour program to reach more schools in Albuquerque 1)1115 several communities outside the city, and a summer music camp program. The Youth Symphony involves some 250 student musicians from both public and private schools. The project is coordinated within the Albuquerque Public Schools Music Department. C. ALBUQUERQUE CHILD GUIDANCE CENTER Under a Title III grant, effective November 1966. the Albuquerque Child Guid- ance Center is being expanded by additioiial professional staffing. It is antici- pated that some 200 additional public and private elementary school children and their families will receive benefits as a result of this expansion. The project program also provides for diagnostic conferences, workshops, seminars, and pupil progress conferences with school personnel. The project is coordinated within the Albuquerque Public Schools Guidance Services Department. D. A STUDY OF THE TYPE OF SCHOOL NEEDED FOR TIlE FUTURE In January 1967 the application for a planning grant to study the type of school needed for the future was approved. A major objective of the project is the involvement of all segments of the community for purposes of consultation and communication in regard to educational goals and program. Tying in with the Albuquerque Title I program, the project will provide scientific research to determine the needs, desires, and basic motivations of the culturally deprived. The project will also make an examination of the variety of educational methods, curriculum patterns, and special services which may serve the needs of both culturally deprived and multi-cultural groups. The project is being coordinated within the Albuquerque Public Schools Office pf Research and Planning. In addition to the projects in operation cited above, the Albuquerque Public School system has submitted the following project applications to be considered for funding under Title III: (A) The Planning and Implementation of a Developmental Education Cen- ter.-This application proposes a program of centering and unifying the services of the following basic components of an educational program: (1) reading; 2) media and materials; (3) guidance and testing. It is proposed to enlist leading scholars in the planning of an educational program wherein the basic in~truc- tional activities and allied services are coalesced in a unified attack upon learn- ing problems, with a particular emphasis upon reading. (B) Workshops to Prepare for time Teaching of Computer Courses in Second- cry Sehools.-This application proposes the implementation of a series of work- shops to prepare teachers in the field of computer mathematics, science, and busi- ness education. The project includes the development of curriculum content for the following high school courses: (1) Computer-Related Mathematics; (2) The Computer as a Business Tool. (C) The Planning of a Space-Science Center for the Schools of Central and Northern New Me~rico.-This application is submitted in cooperation with the Title III Educational Service Center, for which the Albuquerque Public School system serves as fiscal agent. The project provides for the planning of a science center of several components relating to space education. The final program of such a center would be tentatively comprised of the following basic features : (1) planetarium; (2) space science exhibits; (3) investigation center, or laLoratory; (4) facilities for teacher workshops and in-service education. PAGENO="0036" 858 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTATION AMENDMENTS CONCLUSION The turegiiig report provides a summation of the variety of new and supple- nwiltti 1 activities and services funded under the Elementary and Secondary Edu- (`titioll Act of 1U4~'i. It should 1)0 noted that the following related programs have heeti ui;ule possible from other sources of federal funding: ( 1 ) the Neighborhood Youth C rps. serving to supplement the educations of one-hundred school youth. fiiialcd under the Economic ()pIs)rtunity Act : and (2) the reduction of school 11111(11 prices at three public an(l one private school serving heavy concentrations of ts ti ilfli)ahly (lel)rived children, funded under the Child Nutrition Act. E.S.F.A. aiid related legislation have opened new opportunities for the cx- l)l)ratl ti f the learning pricess and the application of new approaches to the (lyilaitlIcs of (immunity and human relations. The identification of need, the pia miii jug and i tajilenientation of programs, and the eventual evaluation of the eff~t~ if the programs upon the lives of children are demanding and complex resle 1 isi ii lit ies. We of the Albuquerque Public Schools recognize. however, tinti. as has been pointe(l out by Secretary John Gardner. great opportunities oftomi q J ~a r uje Ii the scene brilliantly disguised as problems. ExhIBIT A GENERAL EVALUATION Omie if the basic ways in which an overall assessment of change in Title I eligible' schools is being made is by wide-scale sweep testing. At the elementary level, testing is being conducted in an approximate 50 percent random sample of eligiblc' schools. The schedule is designed to make use of and supplement the existuig Albuquerque Public Schools testing program. c;r~ii I'retest Mid year I'osttest 1 Mental maturity readiness Reading achievement. 2 Reading Mental maturity Reading. 3 Reading, arithmetic Reading, arithmetic. 4 Reading, arithmetic, language arts, mental maturity. I Reading, arithmetic, language Reading, arithmetic, language arts. arts. 6 Full battery achievement \lental maturity Full battery achievement. At the junior and senior high school levels, data from the regular Albuquerque Public Schools testing program are being used with some additional 7th, 10th, and 12th grade testing in selected subject matter areas in heavily funded schools. The general test data are being used in the following ways: 1. To provide ire and post test gain score comparisons, to ascertain whether significalat change has occurred with regard to comparison groups and/or prior yea rs. 2. To provide information for studies of longitudinal change: a) tracthg change at. a given grade level from year to year with different populations; b) tracing claange at different grade levels from year to year following the same populattion. 3. T'sing a data retrieval system. any test score data with regard to a given student or a given group of students can be abstracted for specific comparison purposes. 4. Factor analysis and item analysis provide longitudinal information with regard to changing areas of instructional need. ExItIBIT B sChOOL COUNSELING I'rescmit staffing provides approximately 1 day of counseling service per every S days for each public elementary school served, and 1/2 day of service per week for each parochial school. A substantial portion of counseling services has to do with ~rviclitig constiltation and in-service training for classroom teachers and the development of on-going guidance programs. PAGENO="0037" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMEXDMEXT~ S59 This year, appraisal of the program is focusing upon: (1) Changes in behavior and performance of the children referred to the counselor. At the time of referral to counseling and again at the termination of service, the referring teacher rates the child on Behavior Rating ~ca1c. Changes in rating with regard to a) the desira,ble, i.e. "corrected" behavioral out- come and b) the kind of counseling service provided are being analyzed for `suc- cess" or "non-success." Pre and post test data in specific test areas are also being assessed. Comparisons of initial 7th grade adjustment of children Participating in orientation programs and those not participating will be made in September 1967. (2) Changes in demand for the service. (3) Based upon a January 1967 survey of principals, the second highest Iriority in their request for expanded staffing was given to counseling and nursing services, (4) Changes in attitude regarding counseling service. Responses of principals, teachers, and other staff members to the Guidance Services Opinionnaire are being analyzed with regard to changes in counseling services, Projected plans include an estimate of changes in teacher attitudes as measured by pre and post administration of the Professional Check List and Grading Practices Opinionnaire. These will be administered to a sample of 1st, :b'd. a 11(1 ~th grade te;ichers iii 1 ) schi ~o1s receiving maxima I guiditine plo- grams, 2) schools receiving minimal guidance programs. 3 ) teachers participat- big in counselor-led discussion groups, and 4) schools having no (ouhiseling or guidance programs. Case studies and anecdotal material Irovide additional i nforniat ion. ExHIBIT C LEARNING MATERIALS ~ENTEHS Evaluation is concentrating upon a survey of 1. The nature, quantity, and quality of the supplementary materials developed and (lisseminated 2. The extent to which teachers are making use of materials 3. The extent to which teachers indicate that their use of instructional tech- hiiques and materials has changed this year, as the result of the centers, as (111- vared with last year 4. (`hanges in reading (`ompenlencv and oral conhinunication skills aniong tie target population as measured by comparative achievement test scores, teacher ratings, and judgments of time sample tal)e recordings. ExHIBIT I) SUMMER-1903 HEAl) START PROGRAM The basic areas of evaluation inquiry have involved: (1) An assessment of the content of the p~'ograin and its operation. (2) An assessment of the progress of children during the 8 week Head Start program. (3) Follow-up procedures including a comparison of the adjustment and at- tainment, in the regular school program, of children who have had the Head Start experience with children who (lid not participate in the program. The evaluation has also focused upon four major areas: professional and staff reaction, pupil personal and social development. : pupil scholastic readiness :ln(l attninnIent : and parental participation. Tnstru men ts and p?'oeedu res (1) S0~ of teachers, and 90% of all other professional staff members who part~ipated in the Head Start program were systematically interview-ed in small grouj) sessions or individually. Their observations of the cliildrc'n's prog- ress and their reactions to all of the phases of the Hea(l Start operation corn- prise a part of the Albuquerque Public Schools Head Start evaluation report. 2) Administered to a saniple of head Starters on a ire and lost test basis during the S week nrogram: Lee-Clark Readiness Test: Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test: Reproduction of Geometric Designs Test (Developed by Albuquerque Pub- lic schools). PAGENO="0038" 860 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION A~JENDMENTS \Vith regard to the same sample, the teachers responded on a pre anti post basis to the Be1arior/~kill Rating $cale (Adapted by Albuquerque I'ublic Schools from the Head start Check List and Vineland Social Maturity Scale). (3~ Follow-up during the school year 1966-67: September-October: JMrge-Thorndike Mental Maturity Test: administered to Head Starters and non-Head Starters in randomly selected schools. Survey of fatuity iiiembers in Title I eligible schools asking them to com- pare, in a variety of behavioral, skill, and aca(lemic areas. 1st graders who parti('ipated in the I-lead Start prograili and 1st graders who did not. 1)e(elnher Standard Telephone Interview : an individually administered oral meas- ure of communication skills and color knowledge, administered to a sample of high, Iileliuni. and low I.Q. 1st graders of Head Start and iion-Head Start ba(kground. January: Survey of family organization patterns and socio-economic information regarding a sample of 600 first grade children, approximately half Head Starters. half non-Head Starters. Item analysis of Peabody, Lee-Clark, Lorge-Thorndike, and Behavior/ Skill Rating Scale across cultural and socio-economic lines. March: Survey of differential parent involvement, Head Starters and non-Hhead Starters. Behavior Rating Scale: teacher estimate of a sample of Head Starters and non-Head Starters. May: Gates MacGinitie Reading Achievement Test. in randomly selected schools. Comparative attendance and retention figures: Head Starters, non-Head Starters; this school year and prior years; records of Head Starters and older sihlings when at same grade level. ExHIBIT E Federal funding, office of new programs, Albuquerque public schools (Figure to flearest thousand) I. Elementary anti Secondary Education Act of 1965: A. Title I 1. 19(35-66 $1,380,000.00 2. 1966-67 1, 235, 000.00 (Additional allocation expected spring of 1967) 328, 000. 00 13. Title II: 1. 1965-fi6 138, 000. 00 2. 1966-67 123,000.00 (Additional allocation expected spring of 1967) 15,000.00 C. Title Ill: 1. Outdoor Education Center 57, 000. 00 2. Albuquerque Youth Symphony 22, 000. 00 3. Child Guidance Center 92. 000. 00 4. Study of Schools for Future 153, 000. 00 II. Economic Opportunity Act of 1964: A. Flead Start: 1. 1965 104,000.00 2. 1966 204, 000. 00 B. Neighborhood Youth Corps: 1. 1965-66 130, 000. 00 2. 1966-67 136, 000. 00 C'. Tutorial Centers, 1965-66 22, 000. 00 III. Child Nutrition Act of 1966: Spring 1967 (estimated) 8, 000. 00 Total (including expected additional allocations) 4, 147,000.00 Mr. STAPLETON. My remarks w-ill be rather general in that Dr. Chishoim was unable to present a specific statement, but this report should cover most of the information regarding the Albuquerque district. PAGENO="0039" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 861 A little bit of background might suffice to set the stage. Most of us know the district has about a 300,000 population with 76,000 stu- dents in the public schools: 9,750 enrolled iii the nonpublic schools. The number eligible under title I specifically is approximately 7,400. In the grade span of 1 through 12, there are 101 schools in Albuquerque, with 106 in 1967-68. Again, something of a passing nature, there is the fact that Albu- querque has a tricultural, multilingual background, one foot in the Past and one foot in the future, with its historical background in the Rio Grande Valley, and all of the scientific advancement that has occurred as a result of the Sandia Corporation, Los Alamos, and the other Federal programs in the area. Public Law 89-10 has been a tremendous program for the Albu- querque district. I am sure that I speak for many of the programs in the States. I would like to suggest pem'haps certain characteristics to change this about a little bit~. We have found these applicable to our program from the very beginning. First of all, there has been a continued involvement and cooperative relationship developed in the community with regard to title I and title III, title II being pretty much the public school program. I would like to suggest that we have attempted to move on the basis of recognizing individual school projects and at the same time devel- oping projects that are of a systems approach or systemwide approach. I would like to suggest a third characteristic which is essentially that, as we have developed the program, we have attempted to look at a range of services. I would like to comment on this in just a few minutes. Then, fourth, a characteristic that we hope is evident in the report, that there has been a reinforcement from one program to another. I am talking about title I, title II, title III, and even the National De- fense Education Act. And, finally, the fact that we have been for the last year searching for an evaluation design that we hope would get at some of the real merit of our title I, II, and III program. Nicholas Bentley said learning history is easy, but learning the lessons of history is another matter. We feel that the evaluation design or program that w-ill come from our Federal projects will give us the opportunity to learn the lessons of history rather than just merely implementing programs. I would like to indicate that the planning that started for the Elementary and Secondary Education Act in Albuquerque began the clay after the bill was signed by President Johnson, and that they-we began with a project planning committee and the appointment of a coordinator for Federal programs. Very soon after that, we entered into a series of meetings both on a regional and statewide basis that enabled the Albuquerque district, we feel, to sort of get a headstart on the planning phase of the program. We feel also that the. cooperative relationships that have developed with the program have been particularly strong. There was the shake- down period. There obviously was the period of adjustment. But w-e w-ould like to indicate very strongly that. the leadership offered by the State de- PAGENO="0040" 862 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS pa.rtment. of education in our State has beeii very fine. It has been a partiiership effort that we have appreciated in the Albuquerque (liS- trict. We feel that many of the projects under title II and under title I have involved community leaders. I would cite the report indicating under title III the outdoor cdii- cation proect involving 1:~() acres of recreational lands in the Albu- querque area, and the fact that the outdoor education project steiTlme(l from long-expressed needs in the community and that for the first time under title III w-e were al)le to implement such a program. It invoved conimun ity recreation leaders, busmessmen, and professional men, of many walks of life. secondly. the youth symphony project under title III, which had been a longstanding interest, and which was finally expanded under t itle III. And many others of the same type can be cited from the rel)ort. I would like to indicate just two for pui'poses of illustration re- gar(ling the matter of cooperative relationships that I think speak to a larger issue. here. That is the Albuquerque pictorial proiect on page 4 of the report. This ~ogi'~m was a volunteer program at. the be- Lrinning. At that same time, a group of college Stu(lent.S, working with principals of elementary schools serving disadvantaged outh (`stablished a schedule. In the fall of if) apulication for funding to provide for expansion of the prolect was made to the Albiiquei'que Economic Opportunities Board by the l)ul)lic school system. Then a grant from the Office of E(onomie Opportunity financed the prolect from December 196~ to I )ecember 191, at which time funding was brought uiicler title I. At. the l)I'eselit time. approximately 400 pupils in five elementary and two junior high schools of the project area are provided regular tutoring reading and arithmetic by some 400 volunteer tutors. Mr. Chairman, I attended a meeting last week in which this program is still growing, a joint meeting of the Economic. Opportunity Board and the Albuquerque public schools. Four meetings a year are now held, formal meetings between the two boards, in which the projects are discussed. Last week we brought before the board a. program which has l)een endorsed in full by the public schools for early child- hood centers, which we hope w-ill mesh w-ith Albuquerque public schools and Ileadstart. This will be for 4-vear-olds and 3-veai'-olds. Here, again, there is a meshing, an interrelationship between the program. I cannot speak enough about the cooperative relationship that has developed between the EOB in Albuquerque in the 1)ast year and the Albuquerque public schools with the joint planning that has occurred. Let me turn for just a minute. to the question of individual school projects and system projects in the Albuquerque area. This was a decision by design early in the game. There are. illustrations cited in the report of individual school projects. For example, the project of a. pei'sonalmzed curriculum at one. of the high schools in the Albuquerque area called the personalizedi curriculum. At a high school in this project area, a team of four teachers and a counselor work closely together with approximately 80 disadvantaged students. A student is recommended for this program if he exhibits PAGENO="0041" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 863 disorientation to the regular curriculums or the symptoms which char- acterize the potential dropout. The personalized curriculum team concentrates on the need for in- creasing pupil motivation and self-direction, while working to im- prove pupil achievement in basic skills. Vocational and consumer education are integral features of this program. One of the interesting sidelights of this particular program has been that students from the personahzed curricuhim are now offering their services in the tutorial program. This is sort of a spin off which we have had from some of these programs. I would merely note that under system projects we, of course, have (lone what others have reported here, have added librarians, couiiselors, clerks, nurses-many other specialized personnel to all of these projects. May I turn for just a minute to the scope and balance of program and indicate here, again, something by design. WTe have attempted to keep a balance between elementary and secondary. We have attempted to look across the entire spectrum of the curriculum at music, at inathe- matics, at guidance, at. reading. There are two curriculum study proj- ects in the Albuquerque area which we feel are fledgling at the time but we believe they have real promise for the future. They are a project. from grades 0 through 12 on the social studies for disadvantaged. We have another project. in gene.ral mathematics. We have had consultants from around the country visit, the. program. We have had them critique the program. We have had I)eople from the U.S. Office of Education look at it.. Frankly, t.he.y found that. it was so easy for us as a school district. to begin to move around certain content areas without really getting at the problem. Their critique was that we had to develop meth- odology that would make a difference in the teaching in the classroom. This is what. we have been addressing ourselves to during this past. year in developing these particular projects. Let me just indicate with regard to the question of the reinforcing of one program to another whic.h we have felt is important, and it has been alluded to here by Dr. Holt and others. In title I and title II, the title II effort. in our district has really reinforced the title I school programs, the elementary libraries, in which we have been a.ble to fuse together projects aiding particular schools with audio-visual material and specialized material. We feel even in the outdoor educational program we have, a title IH Project. and we are using title I field tril)s. ti'iiiisportat ion trips, and again some of title I ~)rojects are makiiig use of the title II prolect. fun cis. WTe have taken Nationa.l Defense. Education money and are using this to develop support for title I and title II proje.cts. One high school that is not in the. disadvantaged area has been moving in the direction of modular scheduling. What we are hoping to do is to use title II funds to support. this particular program. I would call your atte.ntion to the final point regarding evaluation, which we feel is an important aspect of our program. an(l one we have provided a number of exhibits on the back pages of the report. I would like to close by reading this statement. on program evalua- tion. In the summer of 1966 an Office of Program Evaluation was established and a research psychiogist employed to implement scientific research techniques in the evaluation of these programs. PAGENO="0042" 864 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS A variety of methodology ranging from statistical techniques to the systematized eliciting of parental and teacher responses, is being employed in the assessment process. The most. recent educational measurement devices and data processing facilities are being used to produce a valid and precise reading of the effects of the new programs upon students. The data required for a. full-scale assessment of the past year's opera- tion of the title I program are not yet available. Such data will soon he. available, however, due to the testing and measurements that have been implemented through the Office of Program Evaluation. May I close by stating. by indicating something that Dr. Holt alluded to and which we feel strongly about ? There was a recent article. in an elementary school journal to the effect that Federal funds meant the exit of curriculum planning or the implementation of Fed- eral funding meant the exit of curriculum planning. I suppose the intent was that the. on-going program would suffer as a result of the new programs coming in at. various times, and the kind of planning that would have to be done post. haste in order to implement these. I would like to suggest just the opposite from this article. I dont remember the exact journal that it apl)eared in. \Ve have actually had a Hawthorne. effect. I think Dr. Ilolt alluded to this. We have had a transference effect in that we feel, for example, under title IL if I can specify here, that as we looked at. the new materials available to us under title II the. district was forced to develop selec- tion criteria re~ardin~ the kinds of materials that the rest of the school districts should be using. So this Sort of set in motion the idea that we had to be selective and we had to identify material from material. The transference effect was also evident in the fact that suddenly people in other areas of the city began to be concerned about. their reading program and began to put a little, bit of pressure regarding what can we do about getting a better reading program. This year, as we have been hooking at the evaluation designs, and we recognize we have to have multiple designs l)ecause of the tremendous variety or variability of programs, the entire district is suddenly con- cernecl with proper evaluation design for on-going programs. One that I suppose is fairly obvious is the fact that a number of material `enters have been available to us under title II, which have suddenly prompted other schools which have not really been too concerned to develop a need for material centers. So we would say, counter to this other argument. and I am sure others have presented it, that we feel that. Public Law ~9-lO has produced a kind of Hawthorne effect, a kind of transference effect which has been healthy for our school district. We, ol)viousiy, have some concerns. Of course, the No. 1 concern that our superintendent asked me to convey in test.ifying to the com- mittee concerns the matter of a timetable so that these could be fused in with the program. T will cite one practical example. As we look at. the fall term, as we look at the matter of implementing computerized mathematics courses, as we look at the matter of some of the re.ading programs we, obviously, are talking about spring plan- ning, talking about. schedules for high schools that involve data. processing runs and this kind of thing. PAGENO="0043" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 865 ~o, very prac.tica1ly speakin~, we are talking about our concern for an earlier timetable that wouTd enable the school distric.t. to plan a little more effectively. Then one final one, and that is essentially that we feel throughout all of these programs, particularly as it regards the reduction of class size, there must be a st.rong inserv ice component throughout this program. If we are merely to reduce (lass size and the teaching does not change significantly in these classes, then we as a district, will have failed to implement these Federal fimds correctly. We hope there would be built in something to have greater acces- sibility to the inservice training aspect in all of these programs. Thank you very much. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much. Our next. witness is Dr. Carroll Johnson, superintendent of schools. White Plains, N.Y. STATEMENT OF CARROLL JOHNSON, SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, WRITE PLAINS, N.Y. Mr. .JO1INSON. Chairman Perkins, Mrs. Green, distinguished niem- hers of this committee, I am Carroll F. ,Johnson, superintendent of schools in the. city of White Plains, N.Y., a. community of some. 50,000 population and the county seat of Westchester County, and 8,800 students in tile public schools. Our ~H)00 citizens constitute a cross section of America. We have l)OO~ and rich, we have well educated and 2,00() illiterates in our corn- iirunit. We are working on this problem of illiteracy through Fed- era] and other funding. We have beautiful homes and cold-water flats. Some of our cliii- (iren could ask for nothing in the way of encyclopedias, books, maga- zines, and newspapers, and others have to compete in cold-water flats perhaps for a place to sleep and the proper clothing when they go to school. We have one of the largest of tile urban renewal projects. I think we are. trying in a. significant. measure to take advantage., to tile extent that we may, of the funding which is being made possible through the. Congress for both educational and economic programs which woui(l improve the lots of tile people with whom we are privileged to work. it is indeed a challenge to be able to work in a community which has this cross section, which has tile problems that. we have, and to have this kind of funding available to aid our community. It is indeed an honor to appear before this committee again, as I (lid last. year, and it. is a privilege to testify as to the value of the Ele- mentary and Secondary Education Act, which has done so much to help the students and children of White Plains and others throughout our Nation. Thanks `to funds made available by the Congress under the Elemen- tary and Secondary Education Acts of 19E5 and l~)G6, under the Eco- nomic Opportunity Act. and other Federal legislation, we have l)een able in White Plains to give a "headstart" to approximately 180 pre- kindergarten children in I[eadstart centers last summer and the sum- mer before that. PAGENO="0044" 866 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS We. have undertaken a most effective remedial and enrichment read- ing program for pupils iii the primary, intermediate, and secondary ~rrades in our summer schools of 1965 and 1966. Using ESEA title I funds, we established last April a remedial reading clinic which gives intensive attention to some 90 public, private, and parochial school pupils with critical reading difficulties, and which provides remedial reading specialists to work w-ith other, less critical reading problems among children in the elementary and secondary school buildings of 0111' City. `We are taking care of youngsters w-ho are 2 years or more retarded in reading. `We are concentrating our funds in one area, rather than several, to try to improve the ability of our youngsters to compete on equal terms, educationally and economically. Ours is one of the com- munities w-hich has been cited by the YEA and other organizations for their work in integration. It seems to me that. as we are a.ble to give these youngsters a headstart, whether we call it through this formal name. or a headstart in the upper elementary or ot.her grades by teach- in~r them to read, which is the fundamental tool of learning, as we are able to do this we. are improving our opportunities and the acceptance of our program of integration, in which we believe. Since the funding of title I got starte.d a little bit. late and we were not. able to make commitments, we had funds left over which we were l)ermitte(1 to use for a summer program in the improvement and work in curriculum, in setting up curriculum guides for the culturally cleprive.d and other youngsters. In setting up curriculum guides for the culturally deprived and other youngsters, through title II, as my respective colleagues have testified, we have been able to improve our library opportunities, which, again, is the heart of the program. `We have established a microfilm library in our White Plains High School, which is available not only to the public schools but the pri- vate and parochial schools, and under restricted conditions to the adults of the community. It is the only one in the c.ounty, I believe, and this has been made available through the funds which our Con- gre.ss has provided. I would like to indicate, also, that. we are very grateful for these funds. `We have done our best. to spend them as economically and effectively as w'e spend funds raised through our own local rea.l prop- ertv tax levee. One of the keynotes that we. decided upon when these funds become ~ivailable w-as that any funds, Federal or State funds, should be spent as prudently and as wisely as funds which were carefully scrutinized when we again came t.o our local meetings t.o discuss the local funds. I would like to endorse the Teacher Corps. The heart of improve- ment of any program, w'hether it is for the culturally deprived, for any handicapped child, is the teacher. Many of our teachers have worked in schools which have been predominantly for t.he privileged child, and are not fully aware of techniques and procedures for work- ing with the. deprived child, whether this deprived child be deprived through mental ability, through physical handicap, or through color. As our teachers develop a warmth in working with the handicapped child, our programs become. more effective. PAGENO="0045" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS S67 This is the key. In our own community, our teachers association is completely back of our program of integration and our program for deprived children. Indeed, they have established a committee to provide equal opportunities for all children. Equal opportunities, of course, means for the deprived child and for the bright child. Our teachers are working in all of these angles. I believe that all funds should be directed through the State educa- tion department, that is, educational funds. I would like to speak to the point that Mi'. Ford 1Ilade. because I would answer this that I believe that Headstart should be directed through the State education department. I acknowledge the fact, as Chairmaii Perkins requested me last year, that in some places there is not the availability of space under the direction of the public schools for the time, it seems to me, that the pul)liC schools should be directed and should have through the Office of Education and the State edu- cation department these funds channeled in that manner, and should be allocated in this manner if the public schools are able to accept the programs. It. was mentioned that in Mississippi this was iiot l)ossible. It would seem to me that a proviso should be inserted, too, that no child would he (lenied this privilege. but that if time pullic schools were able to accept. it, it. should be through the puliic schools that they are ad- ministered. I would acknowledge that in New York State we prohal)ly have. one of the strongest of the State education departments. The lea(lershij) there is certainly unparalleled in the country. \Ve have stroii~ leader- ship and it. is again leadership rather than a (lirectol'ship. We are very grateful for that. In Wrhite Plains, the relationship between our pub- I ic schools and the private and paiochnil schools, and the community action program, is absolutely harmonious. WTe have been fortunate in this relationship. W~e have worked to- gether happily and efficiently for the benefit of all the chuidren of our community. But all communitie.s have not been so fortunate. Even in White Plains, the machinery for accomplishing such proj- ects as prekindergarten programs and special summer remedial pro- grams could be greatly simplified if applications for funds and admin- istration of those funds were handled by the agency charged with carrying out the program; namely, the public schools. Such a simplification of procedure would greatly expedite planning and would eliminate a great deal of time-consuming, expensive paper- work. I would indorse the proposal of Dr. Hazlett, that these funds be made available under title I. Another, and then it seems to me, equally cogent argument for put- ting Headstart directly under public school administration tlirou~h the Elementary and Secondary Education Act is that such an arrange- ment would make possible continuous, systematic followthiroughi diii'- ing the primary grades of those children who enrolled now in I[ead- start. preschool classes. As the committee. is aware, the major national evaluation of head- start, published in 1966, disclosed that Ileadstart youngsters iii niaimy communities began losing ground academically aftem ciii eiiii~ recmila r kiiideriraiten and first grade classes. PAGENO="0046" 868 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDITCATION AMENDMENTS If Headstart were incorporated in the public school system as an integral unit of the elementary and secondary program, however, prO- vision could more readily be made to monitor the social and academic progress of each pupil, remedial and enrichment programs could be plani~ed as indicated, and evaluation would be facilitated. One extremely important aspect of the Headstart program is the (levelopment of close working relationships between the schools and economically deprived families. The interests and involvement here of these parents would be easier to sustain when their children enter regular school, if Headstart were in all cases operated by the public s I ool s. It ~eems to me that as we have nurses working with these youngsters, and as we have doctors examining them, and as we work in small ~roups we are learning a great deal about both the child and his family. We are making anecdotal records and reports of these cases. This becomes l)art of the record and part of the knowledge with which the public school undertakes the education of these youngsters. It is. indeed, no mystery, it seems to me, that you have classes where the requirement is 15 for working with the Headstart youngsters, the maximum classes, and then you move them to double that. No wonder that there is a lowering of the efficiency with which these children are taught. The key to the teachers is two things One, the competition and (ledication and warmth of the teacher, arid, two, the classes and the opportunity to know each individual child and to know the family of the child, the roots from which this child comes, it makes all the difference, in the world whether a. child come from the home of one of this committee or come from a cold-water flat where four children were competing for a bed in one room. Throughout the country you have that kind of situation. Some of it is in our affluent Westchester County. The Teacher Corps will help to insure the kind of teacher that we are looking for. It, will give the teacher an opportunity to work in the kind of situation where that teacher will learn this dedication, will get to know the family of these. youngsters and will become enriched through this kind of association. I would urge also that in America we still have rural areas where teachers do not. wish to go, unless there is an unusual dedication. I would urge that the proviso of the Teacher Corps be niade available. The. strength of America is not just in the large cities, although in- c.reasinglv this is becoming the center of population, not~ alone in com- niunities which have a heterogenous population in this suburban corn- mnunitv. but also there are still many youngsters in rural America and time Teacher Corps should be made availal)le there, also. Another important point, one on which there has been a great deal of complaint, is that these funds be spent i)rudlently, that we not rush into projects just. because money is available, and so that we won't let it go by. If we are to spend this money prudently we must. have adequate lame to employ the competent staff which is necessary. If we. start ~i program in September. that program should be funded and we PAGENO="0047" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 869 should know and have certain knowledge and be authorized to begin to employ teachers in January. WTe are involved in a recruitment program. \Ve start school in September and immediately start looking for teachers for the next year. If we do not know by January and are not able to make wise and prudent use of this money, it is not as pi~iideiitly spent as are those funds which are locally derived. 1 dont like to use the word ~coniplaint. but I suppose I will. There is the paperwork. We realize that local districts must be and should be accountable for Federal funds, and we acknowledge the right of the Congress to require meticulous accounting of disbursements and the manner in which disbursements are applied at the local level. But let us work together somehow to simplify all reporting proce- (lures so that the man-hours spent on reports and accounts will be kept to a minimum. It is becoming increasingly difficult for local school budgets to absorb the hidden administrative, clerical and accounting costs necessitated by many Federal assistance programs. Might I say that the programs that are in the areas which need them most are handicapped by the nature of the proposals which are neces- sary in order to receive these funds. I am not speaking for White Plains. because we have develol)ed a degree of sophist icate(l-of sol)lliS- tication-m applying for funds, but the places that need theni most must either put out of the blood and sweat and tears of the adminis- trative staff a proposal which may not be as polished as would be de- sirable in order to receive these funds, or they must go outside and pay a professional plan designer to draw up these plans. I do not believe that it is the purpose of this committee or of the Congress to require school districts to employ outside consultants to design plans in order that they be approved. I would hope that. they might be simplified and that there might be some kind of supervision which would go in and look at a program and see what is being done rather than what a beautiful writing says is being done in our communities. We dont. suffer from this because we have good programs and we have good writers. This is a good combination. But the places that need the program most desperately are not always thus able to provide the polished report and request which is sometimes needed. Another program which has been most helpful is the work study program, the program for vocational assistance for youngsters on t.he job. I shall not dwell upon that. I will conclude by saymng that I per- sonally feel, and I know that my colleagues who are here would agree, that the continuing interests of the Congress, which the Congress has taken, in Federal aid to education during these past several years is indeed one of the most reassuring developments of the post-World W~ar IT era. directly and as a catalyst to State and local endeavor, the as- si1ance provided in legislation sJ)Onsore(l by this committee has en- al)le(l the schools of America to move forward. We have far to go, as my colleagues have testified, and we must make haste, but, with continued Federal, State, and 10(01 (011 al)orat ion. von ha ye no doubt, sir, we shall succeed. Thank you. PAGENO="0048" 870 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS (The document referred to foflows:) STATEMENT OF (`saaocc F. Jonxsox. SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, WHITE PLAINS. N.Y. Mr. (`ha i rmaii and Mcml ~ers of the Subcommittee. I am (`arroll F. .Johnson. Superintendent of Schools in the City of White Plains. New York, a community of some SO.IaI populatioii and the County Seat of `Westchester County. It is indeed an honor to appear again, as I did last year, before this distin- guished (`ommittee. And it is a privilege to testify to the efficacy of the Elemen- tanry and Secondary Education Act, which has done so much to help pupils in White Plains and throughout the nation. Thanks to funds made available by the Congress, under the Elementary and Secondary Education Acts of 1965 and 1966, under the Economic Opportunity Act and other federal legislation, we have been able in White Plains to give a "Head Start" to approximately 180 pre-kindergarten children in Head Start (`enters last summer and the summer before that. We have undertaken a most effective remedial and enrichment reading program for pupils in the primary, intermediate and secondary grades in our Summer Schools of 1965 and 1966. Using USESA Title I funds, we established last April a Remedial Reading (`hub' which gives intensive attention to some 90 public, private and parochial school pupils with critical reading difficulties, and which provides remedial reading specialists to work w'ith other, less critical reading problems among chil- dren in the elementary, and secondary school buildings of our (`ity. With Title I ESEA funds. we also w-ere able to asseaible a faculty team last suninier to review kindergarten through 12th grade curricula in the areas of F:iiglish. science. social studies and mathematics. This team wrote new kinder- garten through 12th grade curriculum guides for the use of our teachers and pre- pared special study guides and teacher material for culturally disadvantaged pupils. Under the Vocational Educational Act of 1963. we were able to arrange part- time em~doynient for 44 students who nrc taking vocational training at the high school. This combination of work and study has enabled most of these pupils to remain in high school and complete their vocational courses. It had the additional benefit of making that vocational tr~ning more meaningful and more useful to the students involved. We have been able to purchase library books and badly needed instruc- tional equipment w'ith federal funds under Titles I and II of the Elementary and Secondary Eduaction Act. And u-c are even now Installing at White Plains High School a microfilm center which u-ill serve the public, private and parochial schools of our city. This microfilm facility will make available to our students the back issues of 28 major periodicals, dating back to the mid-lOth century iii some cases. Unique in Westchester County, the microfilm center will he an invaluable adjunct to our school library and classroom facilities and will serve, as well, adults who wish to do serious periodicals research. Federal aid from all sources for our elementary and secondary programs, in- cluding the National School Lunch Act and the National Defense Education Act totals approximately $413,000 in the White Plains School Budget for the current year. 1966-67. We appreciate this assistance very much. We have done our best to spend these funds as economically and effectively as we spend funds raised through our own local real property tax levy. We have been Invited today to submit comments regarding the proposed Elementary and Secondary Education Amendments of 1987, specifically, amend- ments relating to the National Teacher Corps, to Comprehensive Educational Planning, to Innovation in Vocational Education, to Expanded Educational opportunities for Handicapped Children and to Misceiancous amendments in- eluding the Federally Impacted Areas Program. The proposed amendments take account of many pressing needs of our so- ciety and our schools. The amendments are worthw-hile and farsighted, and I believe that they should all be enacted into law. In certain particulars. however. I believe it would be possible to strengthen time proflose(l legislation so that federal funds allocated under these amendments would go farther and do a more effective job. PAGENO="0049" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTATION AMENDMENTS S71 The first revision I would suggest, if I may, is one which has bearing not only upon the particular amendment in question, the N~tiona1 Teacher Corps, but also upon the underlying philosophy of federal aid to education. We have previously stated in testimony before this Committee, and else- where, our conviction that the most effective, most economical and most equitable manner of apportioning federal funds for education is through the state edu- cation departments of the several states. This conviction, I believe, is one shared by perhaps a majority of my col- leagues in public education and in educational administration. The inescapable fact is that the state education departments are In the best position to assess local needs, establish and uphold high educational standards, nionitor the care with which federal funds are utilized locally, and keep federal monies from being dissipated in a proliferation of overlapping programs which duplicate effort and diminish the impact of federal assistance. In White Plains we have been very fortunate indeed, as I told this Com- mittee last March, in the harmonious relationship between the schools and the local Community Action Program. We have worked together happily and effi- (`iently for the benefit of all the children of White Plains. Similarly, the working relationship among the public, private and parochial schools in our city has been exemplary. But other communities have not always been so fortunate. And even in White Plains, the machinery for accomplishing such projects as pre-kindergarten pro- grams and special summer remedial programs could be greatly simplified if applications for funds and administration of those funds were handled by the agency charged with carrying out the program-namely, the public schools. Such a simplification of procedure, would greatly expedite planning and would eliminate a great deal of time consuming, expensive paper work. I-lead Start, for instance, could well he placed Iln(ler the Elementary and Sec- ondary Education Act, since it is, in the final analysis, a school program. The time now spent in clearing Head Start plans and applications through two aren- des, the schools and the community action board, could better be devoted to (Ic- veloping closer coordination among the schools and other community agencies on mi wider front. In White Plains, for example, there is developing a very fruitful cooperation betw-een the schools and the neighborhood centers operated jy the (`ommunity Action Program. It would seem more productive to concentrate on inter-agency collaboration in this area, leaving the schools to deal directly with such school-oriented programs as Head Start and the Elementary Sununer School. Another cogent argument for putting Head Start directly under public school administration through the Elementary and Secondary Education Act is that such an arrangement would make possible continuous, systematic followthrough during the primary grades of those children who enrolled In Head Start pre- school classes. As the Committee Is aware, the major national evaluation of Head Start published in 19(16 disclosed that Head Start youngsters in many communities began losing ground academically after entering regular kinder- garten and first grade classes. If Head Start were incorporated in the public school system as an Integral unit of the elementary and secondary program, however, provision could more readily be made to monitor the social and academic progress of each pupil, remedial and enrichment programs could he planned as Indicated and evaluation would be facilitated. One extremely important aspect of the Head Start program Is the development of close working relationships between the schools and economically deprived families. The interest and Involvement of these parents would he easier to sus- fain when their children enter regular school, If Head Start were in all cases operated directly by the public schools. In the proposed 19(17 amendment dealing with the Teacher Corps, provision is very wisely made for the State Education Departments to develop programs at the request of a local school system, and in collaboration with a local univer- sity This would appear to be a sound arrangement, especially since it is the State Education Departments which set and maintain teaching standards and certification requirements for the several states. We think it extremely far- sighted to place the National Teacher Corps under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and to provide funds for a Teacher Corps program which w-oulcl he extended for three years. through fiscal year 1970. plus authority enabling a teacher-intern who begin training in 1970 to continue flint traininr for ~n additional year beyond 1970. 7~-492-G7-pt. 2-4 PAGENO="0050" 872 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS However, we see the pitfalls of ambiguous and overlapping authority as being ijilierent in the proposed provision for Teacher Corps members to be assigned to groups ~`not in a regular school. groups taught by a public or other non-profit agency.' I believe there is grave peril implicit in the assignment of Teacher Corps teams to groups of children `not in a regular school," groups which (10 not answer di- re('tly to the public education regulatory authorities of the states in which they lwrate. Generally, speaking, children who most need an inspired and competent Teacher Corps are the very children whose entire educational and cultural back- ground is so far below par that a monumental effort will be requiTed just to lift. theuii to the norm; just to enable them to compete on anything like an equal footing with their more economically privileged peers. This effort will demand the concerted, coordinated efforts of all arms of public education, an effort which would bring to bear in the most efficient. uwinner all the professional resources the states and the federal government, together. can niuster. The available funds should not be diffused among many, unrelated agencies. On the other hand, there is the problem of the migrant worker's child, and of the minority group child in rural areas where the state's own public edu- cation system, for whatever reason, is not functioning adequately, is not meeting the educational needs of children. The amendment as it now stands no doubt reflects the Committee's entirely justifiable concern about this very problem. But I do not think volunteer schools, or schools operated by various other private non-profit agencies are the answer. The Committee has already moved toward solving the problem by the re- quirement, embodied in the National Teacher Corps legislation, that local edu- (`ational agencies must receive approval from the state educational agency before receiving Teacher Corps services. However, regulatory authority over quasi-public or private non-profit educa- tional institutions varies widely from state to state, and the educational stand- ar(ls and practices of such independent educational agencies are varied. Moreover, many state education departments are not adequately staffed to provide valid evaluation of these institutions. To strengthen duly constituted systems of public education within the sev- eral states and to assure maximum benefit from Teacher Corps services, it would appear advisable to incorporate in the legislation an explicit require- ment that. Teacher Corps members be assigned only to public schools and to sU('h special federal educational institutions as the schools operated by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. It might also be wise to construct the 1967 amendments so as to give state education departments some powerful incentive to assign Teacher Corps teams for schools in deprived rural as well as deprived urban areas. The Committee aught also consider further incentives designed to encourage state education departments to establish permanent or mobile schools for the children of migrant workers. in areas where such schools are needed and do not exist. Matching funds or special grants. ke,ved to eligibility for receiving Teacher Corps teams, could be devised to provide this incentive. Such an approach should have a dual effect: It should improve public education in deprived local areas while, at the same time, improving the public education program at the state level. Such an approach might also have lasting impact on both state and local education. Schools, once constructed, mobile units once purchmused and put into operation as traveling classrooms, will create a self- sustaining demand for the edu('atioIl they bring to disadvantaged children in out-of-the-way places. This approach. I believe, would strengthen the already existing public education structure of the states, consolidate efforts to help under- privileged youngsters. and avoid possible fragmentation of the federal assistance ~rogram among a multitude of private and quasi-public volunteer educational organizations. The important objective is to get Teacher Corps teams not only iIit() the blighted areas of our large cities. and to areas where there are tem- porary concentrations of nuigrant workers, but also to get these teams into chronically depressed aiul edu('ationally neglected rural farm areas. Fsing the Teacher Corps thus to strengtheui public schools in depressed rural areas W0lli(l affect not only the immediate education of children in those areas. It would PAGENO="0051" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 873 also have a long range effect upon the total economy of such areas by helping to create a skilled, literate local labor force which would facilitate diversification of agriculture and attract new industries. The evident long range possibilities for economic improvement would undoubtedly help secure the acceptance and active cooperation of State Houses as well as State Education Departments. On the proposed comprehensive Educational Planning amendment, we heartily concur in the Committee's judgment that local education expenditures of the magnitude of $27 billion demand a program of systematic statewide planning and evaluation. I believe the proposed five-year program of planning grants for the States will he of invaluable assistance. I note that $15 million would be authorized for comprehensive planning for fiscal year 1965. This is a commendable federal contribution toward a most important need. but at the risk of seeming ungrateful, I would like to emphasize that., especialli~ in the ease of fvndinq on a ~~ear-to-year basis, it is imperative- and I use the word advisedly IMPERATIVE-to enact fund authorization NO LATER~ THAN JANUARY for any program which is to be operative in schools or in educational planning divisions by the following September. Many school systems and state education departments operate on a July 1 to June :~o fiscal year. They must recruit professional personnel in January. February and very early March if they are to secure competent teachers and specialists. `Without a firm, early spring commitment on funding, personnel simply cannot be secured in time. and there are grave delays in ordering supplies and equipment, as well. Belated funding severely impairs any program and is the most common, most deeply felt criticism of the entire program of federal assistance. The next most common complaint is. as you have heard, paperwork. We realize that the local district must he accountable for federal funds, and we acknowledge the right of federal departments and the Congress to require meticulous accounting of dis- bnrsenTents and the manner in which disbursements are applied at the local leveL But let us work together, somehow, to simplify all reporting procedures so that the man hours spent on reports and accounts will he kept to a minimum. It is becoming increasingly difficult for local school budgets to absorb the hidden administrative, clerical, and accounting costs necessitated by many federal assistance programs. The proposed amendment. to the Vocational Education Act of 1963 establish- ing a five-year program of grants for vocational education is another highly commendable undertaking. On the basis of our experience in White Plains, I would urge that a large proportion of the funds for this prograni be ear- marked for helping public high schools develop comprehensive, well-planned w-ork-study programs, and also for incentives which would encourage business and industry to become and remain fully participating partners in such work- study endeavors. Another highly desirable application of vocational assistance funds is in the area of guidance and counseling for vocational students from the junior high years through the senior year of high school. Any funds which will strengthen high school job placement services and enhance continuing cooperation between industry and the high schools will be funds wisely invested. The Committee is understandably concerned that funds allocated to the states on the basis of population age 15 to 19 be limited to programs which will not displace already employed workers or impair existing contracts for services. The Bill ~Vould also stipulate that these funds should not be used to pay any part of the compensation of a student working for employers other than public or private non-profit agencies. It should be recognized, however, that properly supervised student internships in business and industry provide valuable training in many skills and technol- ogies which are not found in public institutions or private non-profit organiza- tions. In White Plains, for instance, we have secured the cooperation of some local merchants in a small-scale local work-study program. One of the unique opportunities which comes immediately to mind is that afforded our students who work with a White Plains furrier, learning the highly specialized tech- niques of catting and matching skins for fur garments. Any work-study program involving private industry must, of course, have built-in safeguards to prevent displacement of workers or substitution of student employees for adult workers who would otherwise be hired. If funds are avail- able for continuous teacher supervision of work-study pupils, however, business firms and industrial concerns might be more receptive toward work-study ar- PAGENO="0052" 874 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTJCATION AMENDMENTS rangenients wIii(h wwld enable groups of students to spend several weeks each year iii (n-the-job training situations. Students might combine such non- paying industrial training periods with regular part-time work in public and non-profit agencies, for which work they could be compensated from Vocational Education Act funds. Furthermore, many businessmen simply cannot afford to participate in student training programs because of the time involved in directing and supervising trainees. If each small group of trainees were accompanied by `a full-time teacher supervisor, who would remain with the student group on the job, mer- chants and small local industries would be more interested in making their prenuses available for student trainee groups. Full-time teacher supervision is, of course, expensive. Certainly, it would entail adding vocational teachers to most high school faculties involved in such programs. The best we can do in White Plains at this time, for example, Is to provide general supervision by voca- tional counselors who regularly visit firms where work-study pupils are on the sob. Federal assistance in the area of student trainee supervision, on-the-job. would be very helpful. Additionally, nominal monetary grants might be given to participating busi- nesses and industries. This would compensato the employer for the time he and hjs employees must spend working with student trainees. Regulations gov- erriing the conduct, length and conditions of such trainee programs could be written into the legislation to Insure that student work-study programs would not jeopardize the employment of adult workers. On the contrary, such grants could stimulate considerable interest in the student trainee program, `among (`Inployers and owners and among adult workers and union representatives. Two-part grants, including a sum for the employer and a sum for the adult employee in charge of trainees on plant premises, might well be considered. Again, in the case of vocational assistance, we would urge the Committee to allocate all funds through state vocational boards and state education depart- nients. We would also urge that federal assistance be limited explicitly to lublic local and regional high schools and vocational schools which are under the authority of state vocational boards and state education departments. Con- ditions could be established whereby students who regularly attend Independent arid parochial schools could enroll in the federally assisted vocational programs conducted by the public schools. Finally, I would ask the Committee to consider, in funding all existing and future programs, the very considerable overhead, administrative and planning costs Incurred by state education departments and local school systems partici- pating In federally aided projects. Staff time and consultant services required in the planning and application stages, clerical, accounting and administrative costs Incurred as the program moves Into the operative stage-all these add up. Allowance should be made for these costs when funding. Moreover, a significant proportion of the total federal grant should be available Immediately upon approval of each local project, so that monies will be at hand to meet financial obligations. In New York and some other states, federal funds cannot be comingled with other local budget funds, nor can the local school dIstrict borrow nioney required to meet immediate obligations, since no part of federal grants may be used to pay Interest. Therefore, the importance of substantial, Immedi- ate funding of local projects is obvious. I am gratified that the Committee has recognized the need for research and innovation in its proposed amendments. This is one area of very great potential, but an area for which these is seldom sufficient local money. Systematic research and development In new materials, methodology and pro- grams must he undertaken, coordinated and sustained at federal, state and local levels if education is to meet the challenge of a rapidly changing world. Funds to help state education departments and local school systems train personnel in these new techniques and new fields should also be considered in planning future federal allocations. The knowledge is available: but we must have men and women w-ho know `here to find it and how to apply it. In short, we need any assistance t.hat will enhance and enrich the kindergarten through 12th grade program for all children, any help that will enable us to take cleser account of each (`hil(l'S unique needs and talents, any support which will help e(lucators keep abreast of new developments, evaluate them w-isely, and apply therii to the benefit of all the boys and girls in our schools. I personally feel-and I know that most of my colleagues would agree-thaf tie' rntinuing interest the (`en~ress has takeit in federal aid ti education diir- PAGENO="0053" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 875 jug these past several years is, indeed, one of the most reassuring developments of the Post-World II era. I )irectly arid as a catalyst to state and local endeavor. the assistance pro- videtl in legislation sponsored by this Committee has enabled the schools of America to move forward. We have far to go. and we must niake haste, but with continued federal, state aird local collaboration I have no doubt that we shall succeed. Chairnian PERKINS. Thank you very much. Mrs. Green. Mrs. GREEN. I would like to make one brief statement which I direct primarily to 1)r. Ilazlett., if I may. If it affects w-ork-studv p~ogI'rlms in other pai'ts of the country, so be it. W~e had a superintendent. yesterday who referred to tire fact that they had woi'k-st.udy programs for the boys. I know on page 7 of your statement. that you have work-study programs for a large number of boys. If the girls are not. included in work-study or if there. is any discrimination in terms of opportunity, in my ~u(lgment. it is a viola- tion of title VII of the Civil Rights Act. I have contacted the Equal Employment Opportunity (1oniniissioii and have asked for a ruling on this. Since it is just emplovnTent. on a part-time basis, with the schools, that it would not be any different than any other kind of emplovnient. I expect to have a ruling from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission shortly, I think if they rule it is a violation, then the funds ought to be held up or ought. to be recovered. I would like to direct questions, if I may. to the vocational phases of education in 5 minutes. Chairman PERKINS. Mrs. Green. you have i'aised an important point and I thii~k the gentleman ought to respond to the first portion of your question. If there is discrimination against the ladies in the work study, I think w-e ought to have an explanation of it. Mr. T-L~zLErr. I appreciate the opportunity to respond briefly. `We have two small w-ork-study programs. One is sponsored by pri- vate funds, from a foundation. Tt is about. 5 years old. it is a real piece of experimentation based upon the theory that about. 15 percent of the boys will not fit into a regular high school program. T think, as we all know', for some reason ci' other boys seem to have greater difficulty in going through the regular school program in grades I through I~ than do girls, with various reasons given all the time for this. The other program, in conjunction with tire Rotary Club, does w-ork w'ith both boys and girls. Industrial leaders in the community are w'orking w-ith the schools in placing people of both sexes. The first program is about to conclude as a research experiment.. It i~ being w'ritten up. We do see the desirability of having programs for girls as well as boys. Mrs. Gnrrx. Thank you very much. Dr. Ilazlett. T have a very high regard for your professional competence. Tf I may. I would like to make a couple of other comments. T think the Civil Rights Act does not differentiate betw-een private and public emnio\'ment. `Whether Federal funds are used in w'oi'k study or exclusively private funds, it makes no difference. PAGENO="0054" 876 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS In regard to boys not finishing the 12 grades of school the statistics show that there are as iuaiiy as a couple of years ago. Fifty-one peieiit of the (l101)OUtS iii high school were girls, and 49 pei'cent were boys. I think the Statistics today are very similar. The highest unemployment rate in the Nation is aniong nonwhite girls between 16 and 21. 1 (10 not want to argue today whether or not women should oi shoul(l not be working. But the facts are that one out of every three employed in the country is a woman. Therefore, in 1967, I can't quite buy the defense that the boys need the program more than the girls. ~\Iav I tulfl to the vocational education recommendations by the Office of Education I consider this probably the most important Inirt. of the 196T amendments. I would like to first direct the question to the superiiitendent from Albuquerque. if I may, and then ask others to comnielIt. I am well aware of the controversy and newspaper articles in the Albuquerque press over the Job Corps center for girls in Albuquerque. The question. that I would like to address to you revolves around an allegation that has been made . That the girls in Albuquerque center have had 2 or 3 hours, in sonic cases 4 hours, of work during the entire (lay iIiI(l not necessarily ~ days a week, but sometimes 2 clas a week or 3 (lays a week: and further the allegation that they are not in any way being trained for remulierative employment while in the center. The sv~c~~ic (1uest ions to any school superintendent are: `What do you think you could (10 if we, as an alternative procedure., said to a large city school superintendent, or said to the State department of ecluca- tioli. would von explore this ? What kind of a program could you pu~ together that would include on-the-job training, taking advantage of work-study. eoml)ining it with MDTA, with the. residential center? You woul(l have a residential environment for those youngsters who need a change of environment and you could concentrate effort on the voimgsters who would stay at home but come there during the day- I inme. What kind of a pro~xram could you design for your city for ~,OO() Pr" student ? Mr. STAPLETON. As you know, we have the Technical Vocational Institute, which was developed several years ago and recently was strongly endorsed by a number of community leaders. Mrs. GREEN. Is that a resi(lential school Mr. STAPLETON. No, it isn~t. There have been some plans identi- fled. They certainly have not been formalized. But they indicate that. this could be the direction to go, in terms of a residential area. The Technical Vocational Institute has been received with such enthusiasm, the nature of the. program has been in such a short time made so comprehensive, as we see it, with a broad spectrum of courses involving some of the traditional basic courses and then some. of the new courses. such as data processing, that we feel that if funds could be channeled in this direction, `the district could expand much faster. As it is now, it. is a holding action, hoping that the program will get continued endorsement. There was a recent effort. to receive some funding from the State legislature. PAGENO="0055" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 877 Our feeling is that in the Albuquerque district we certainly feel that~ through the Technical Vocational Institute, which we feel has had reasonable success during a short time, we could expand the pro- gram, we could make programs more comprehensive. We certainly could reach out and touch a larger population and we could explore the whole question of the residency which someone in the area has already indicated they would like to explore. Mr. JOHNSON. I don't think I am the appropriate person, but when you speak of $8,000, I am very interested, and I am stimulated. I indicated to you earlier that we had handicapped children. I would want to start a residential center. I would improve our supervision. I would improve the recruitment of jobs. I would have our supervisory staff working with this on-the-job training program, and have them move out into the businesses and industries to keep close tab on these youngsters. I would do all of this within the scope of the comprehensive high school. I think there is an unfortunate move in this country away from the comprehensive high school in the direction of vocational educa- tion which segregates and moves aside youngsters of different abilities and different interests, and so on. I think they have common interests which are greater than the different interests. I would like very much to see that. If we had an on-the-job program for both boys and girls, clerical work, auto mechanics, in anything where we could get an employer to work with the.m, I would like to see it. But~ our supervision is not, as adequate as I would like it to be, be- cause we have to do that with one man and one woman working with these people. The one man works with boys and girls and the woman works primarily with the girls in clerical and in sales work. But I would like very much to see. it. I would like to see some of us have the opportunity to develop such a program for the child who should be taken away from his family. The family is one of the reasons in many instances for the cultural deprivation of the. youngster. When he comes to a. good school a11(l goes home, he goes to a. very unfortunate circumstance, and unfortunate surroiniding, which works in conflict fewer times than we would like to say, but~ sometimes. (`liairman PERKINS. Do you wish to comment, Dr. bit? First, let me call on Mr. Quie at this time. Mr. QUIE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. .Johnson, you have an excellent statement. I like especially what you say about the need of admiunistemimig education programs through Stat.e departments of education and how Headstart administered by local public schools would actually improvt amid strengthen it. I am glad you mentioned the family-school relationship. This is one of the criticisms which has been leveled against the. traditional education concept. I am glad you recognize it so well. Rather than going over the parts of your statement that I agree so much with, I would like to inquire about your comments on the Teach- ers Corps. You seem quite enthused with the Teachers Corps and encourage that it be spread out. to the rural areas and to migrant work- PAGENO="0056" 87S ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS CFS ioore thaii just the urban centers. There is a tendency to limit. it to the urban centers since that is where the institutions of higher learn- i1I~ are locate(i. ~1Oll have to bring them to the inst.itut.ioiis for their learnin~ sessions. You seem to have the concept, however, that. the Teachei~ Corps is not. only to bring people who previously ha.d no interest in education, but developed one later, into the teaching profession, and also to bring hem special training in the culturally and socially deprived children. Also von mention the help that they give to the children in the district. Since this is the case, and I find people tend to look at a Teachers (urps the way the blind man looks at the elephant, would you be will- iIiL~ to fiiral a portioii of the stipend or the salary of these. teacher in- tei'i~s to the extent of the benelit you receive in your school from their services? Mi. .Joiixsox. ~ personally would be willing to fund a part of it thiouuii the local funds. But one of the points that this committee and Con~ress has recognized is that there is a need to provide these pro~rams over and beyond what. is now being (lone. If we were required to match the funds, which in essence. is what the question you are asking is about, I might say yes, I would be willing to, hut whether we would be able to is something else. In Westchester County, three of our larger cities are right, up against the t.ax limita.- tion. and what. we can do and what we would like to do are sometimes different. We woul(l not, in my opinion, be able to go into such a. program next ear, or perhaps the year following that : Philosophically, I agre.e with von, sir. but matching funds sometimes if categorically applied drains away the general support. of education. If von were asking would I support. this in legislation, no, sir, I would not. Mr. QUTE. Then with the glowing remarks you made about the Teachers Corps. they are really not sufficient, however, to cause you to put some local funds into this program because it would even be superior and more necessary than some of the education activities you are already engaged in with local funds. Mr. Joiixsox. You see, this is comparable to the situation of when I ~ro to my desk and take on the pressing jobs, but many times the less inhl)ortaflt. jobs. I do the things which have to be done that day and not the long-range, important things. That. same thing would apply here. It seems to me it. is an obliga- tion of the state, more than of the local area, to provide this kind of educational program. it is the obligation of the country, since these people will lie working in all kinds of areas, it is the obligation of the Congress and of the local State to provide this training in education of teachers, and not that of the local district which is concerned vitally with the (lay-to-day providing of reading, writing and arithmetic and those other things regarded as important by the local community. Mr. QfIE. So the assistance provided by the t.eacher interns is not sufficient. to lessen the load or improve the education of the young people in your schools where you would be willing to transfer some funds from another purpose to this one? PAGENO="0057" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDT~'CATION AMENDMENTS 879 Mr. ,JoHNsox. I seem to 1)e evasive on that and I don't intefl(l to be. It is sufficient to provide that. But. so are many of the other kinds of things that we can do, but we just dont have funds to provide. When it comes to a matter of providing funds for this supplementary program which we can do without, and providing the salaries, the necessary funds for the teachers, we might just not be perrnitte(l locally to provide this training program for the country at large. or for the State at large. It is this that I am referring to. It. is not that I would question the validity or value locally, but it is just that we in so man instances do not have this kind of funding available locally. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Dent? Mr. DENT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I notice throughout the hearings there is a tendency to arrive at a conclusion that the Fleadstart prognim ought to be tran~feii'ed from the act. un(ler which it is now, and l)lit into the public school svsteni throughout. the State departments of education. Have any of you superintendents looked up your State laws to find out whether or not you could absorb the present tpe of a Headstart law without running contrary to your State provisions of law'? In the last decade, we have had many reforms in education in our State and others where we have set up pretty strict rules on teacher qualifications, classroom compositions, and other restrictions that are not inherent in the Federal participation in that program, an(l also the Teacher Corps program, and others. If we suddenly dunipeci Headstart onto the State de1)a1tn~ents of education all over the country, how many States would have to have enabling acts immediately for them to absorb this program? I know that we would have to have it in my State. We could not absorb this program as it is now constituted. First of all, we do not. interfere with State regulatory bodies in the application of tiie State laws. I don't think you can absorb the head- start program as it. is now operating into your State. systems entire- ly wit.hout Federal participation in the program, and with the over- riding Federal hand on it. I don't think so. Maybe you can answer that, Mr. Johnson. You were the. first one who made the positive statement that. Headstart should be trans- ferred directly and bodily over to t.he State departments of edu- cat.ion. Mr. JOHNSON. Sir, I hedged a bit. and said if those departments could take it, the proviso be made if they couldn't either through the Constitution or through legislation, that it could go somewhere else. Of course, we do spe.a.k from knowledge of our own State. In spite of the desirability that. we w-ould like to know the laws of the other State.s, in many instances w-e don't. In our own State. for example, we. could, legally and otherwise, accept this proviso. I would feel unless there is provision against, it. as w-as indicated when Mississippi was mentioned, I would make the proviso that. I would wa.nt this program available since it is extremely valuable afl(l some loophole might be made if t.he States and local districts were. unable or unwilling to accept the program. Mr. DENT. Of course, that would make it sort of a. hydra-headed monster. We would be running a program in one State and across PAGENO="0058" 880 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDIJCATION AMENDMENTS the border the State departmeiit of education would be running it. It. would be a peculiar thing. The State departments operate in the same fashion, you might think, as we operate in the Federal Gov- e rn ment.. But you cannot run your schools without doing exactly what. the State tells you to, as to classroom sizes, teacher qualifications, and so on, because the State pays a certain amount. of the expense of the local school district, and we are pa.ying a certain amount. If you have participating programs we would have to have some say as to which tune the children were going to dance to. Is that right or wrong? `Mi. .Joi-ixsox. You are getting into a. philosophical statement. Mr. DENT. No, I am getting into the practical political situation of getting legislation through the Congress with the great sums of nioney attached. Mr. Quie indic.ated that there seems to be a tendency t~ inve not only Headstart over to public education in the various States, hut soon the Teacher Corps. The reason we went into these programs on the Federal basis was be- ~a use we had failed at the State level to take cognizance of the great Pl'oblerns facing our people, and we are, therefore, pumping Federal nionevs into the. local boards where it is needed. It is difficult for local s(hool districts and State governments to pro\~1de necessary funds for the essentials in education, let alone these other needs. \ou talk about vocational school training and a comprehensive high sliool. We have failed miserably in vocational training in the various States. The.re isn't a greater shortage in the United States than a shortage of vocational graduates to take their place in industry, in the construction trades. We. have completely gotten away from carpentry and cabinetmaking in our high school classes of manual arts. I know we don't have them 0111' schools. We have over 600 trade schools in Pennsylvania which have kept. us pretty well abreast of the needs in that State, but some States have no schools whatsoever. A comprehensive high school would be a responsibility of the local (~mn1unity. How many of your high schools have training courses in vocational classes that would graduate a kid from high school-at. the time he finished high school-able and ready to step into a voca- tIonal training job Mr. BRETT. We have in business education, but not in the trades. Mr. DENT. That is because it is a soft-skirt job. You don't have the liai'd blue-collar jobs in any of your schools any more. (`hairman PERKINS. Mr. Bell? Mr. BELL. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman front Minnesota, Mr. Quie. Mr. Q~IE. I would like to ask the gentleman from New Mexico ;li)OUt the title III program. I understood title III was to fund sup- pleniental centers, supplemental programs which would strengthen and improve education throughout an area, and it would be widely l)eneflclal to elementary and secondary education. I notice that you are talking of a space science center and one of the basic features is a planetarium. Mr. Breit, do you think that secondary schools of the c.ountry really need a planetarium as much as they need a host of other improvements in order that the young people might have an adequate education? PAGENO="0059" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDT~TCATION AMENDMENTS 881 I hope you don't think I join necessarily with the, gentleman from Pennsylvania that we ought to have more cabinetmakers, but I dont know if we need as far out a program as planetariums in the secondary S(1 i ools. Mr. STAPLETON. Mr. Quie, this program, of course, again is one that we have applied as a district. WTe are fiscal agent for the educational service center, which is located at. the Fniversity of New Mexico. We have for some years in the Albuquerque area had a number of people \vll() lut ye been pressing for a plamietarium, a moon-watch feoni that has received a great deal of publicity and support in the local area in the State of New Mexico. So part of the background for this has been the request that has come for the planetarium. The key element for us, a.t least. in the Albuquerque area, is that we would hope to see the space scient.ist.s program developed that would give us an opportunity on a central basis to service communities in the local area, 10, 15, 20, and 30 miles from Albuquerque, tha.t. are all part of this educational service center. We would hope that this would be the real heart. of that program if it gets approved. It will give us an opportunity to bring young- sters in from not only our school district but some of the others. As to the relative merits of a planetarium, pers~ally I feel that the spa.ce science program with its related areas is proba.bly more iniportant, and the opportunities for the inservice education that we might, give. the teachers, the workshops, aII(l so forth. The planetarium, again, as I say, is a special interest and one which has been pressed for because they felt this was not available anywhere in the New Mexico area. Carlsbad, N. Mex., put in a planetarium a number of years ago and t.hey have testified to the fact that they have enriched their science program in the Carlsbad area and the surrounding environs for quite awhile. They speak highly of the motivational fa.ctor, the fact that youngsters are taken on field trips and this type of thing. So this is part of the. rationale for this being include.d here. Mr. QUTE. It really is a problem for me when I visit Hines School in the District of Columbia. and see the terrible conditions there and some ot.her schools here, where the Federal Government has the responsibility, and then to see. that. we are financing planetariums. I sometimes think we lost sight of what are our most important needs. Mr. STAPLETON. I would speak to the fact that, of course, this is just one element. Our feeling has been, under title III, that we would attempt. to develop any number of programs. The first. one listed there on page 9 of the Albuquerque project speaks of a develop- mental education center, which is in essence a. reading clinic, which we would hope would be the balancing fac.tor, and that. w-e would have areas such as B, speaking to the computer c.ourses in secretary schools, science being just the third component. We hope that we are moving along on several fronts as we look at all of these projects. ~lr. Q't~TIE. Let. me ask one question on the NYC in-school program. You have all indicated you would hike education progra.ms funded through the. State department of education. We have two Neighbor- PAGENO="0060" 882 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS hood Youth Corps ~)rogran1s being talked about, one in school and one out of school. I recognize the out-of-school program would not be your responsi- bility. But do you think this program, too, could function better if it was administered by the schools, and, therefore, was transferred from OE() to the ()flice of Education Mr. IIAzLE1'T. We operate a ~eighIl)orhood Youth Corps group of sonic 4(t) peol)le. We have had no problem in working out relation- ships with the J)epartment. of Labor. I think the concern of many of us wit hi respect to utilizing the State educational agency is that it' seems it would he more efficient if educational programs could be synchro- nized to~iet Tier and that more efficiency would result. I cannot criticize, however, our own experience with respect to the NYC piogi~im. Mr. QUIE. In other words, you have more. pi~ob1ems with OEO than you do with the T)epartment of Labor, I gather? Mr. IT.\ZLETT. That is what. I said.' Mi. flrirrr. I would I ike to add to that. \Ve have a ~eighborhood `~outhi ( oi~ ~ progriuni that was worke(l very well. We have had no pi'olulems there at all. But in relationship to the. Headstart. pro- raui~ we have strong feelings that it would be. better under the LS. Office of L(lncatioll direction and as a part of the local school program operations. Our program in Seattle is on a contract. basis and we lian(lle it. ( `hiairnuan T~F:TIKTNS. Mr. Brademas. ~\1r. Bu,~nr~r~s. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will direct this question to Dr. Holt.. First of all, Dr. Holt, I wonder if you could make any general comment on the impact. of the Elementary and Secondary Act of 1965 on the school system of South Bend, md Mr. Hoj:r. Yes, Mr. Brademas. I indicated the city of South Bend was recovering and is now recovering from being an economically (lel)resse(1 area. We have simply enriched a program in 13 of 50 schools that brought materials that we would not otherwise have had in terms of instruction materials, books and so on. As I said, the im- I)o1~timt l~ J)roduct of this, too, is the inspiration furnished the entire corn mun ity. \Ve have an enrollment of about 38,000 students, and we have, as in White ~ sonic of the upper socioeconomic groups. the most ad- vantaged. to the most disadvantaged. I think it has infected the whole cornniunitv with a commitment to beT j) the~e 1)eoPl(~, to help I hiese children. Mr. B1~\DEM~~s. Let me ask you this question : Mr. Quie touched on title III. I know that South Bend has submitted a title III appli- cation. Fnder h)1~ese1~t law, the State. departments of e(lucatlon are to review an(l recommend on local applications. Suggest ions have been made that a statutory veto should be au- thorized for the state departments of education. Do you have any (oniment on that Mr. Hoi:r. Yes: I would like not to see them shortstopped at the State level. I would like to see us be able to 1)resent these audi have them go through. I am not sure that I like the veto at all in the State. I would rather they not have this. PAGENO="0061" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTATION AMENDMENTS 883 Mr. IRR\i)EMAS. Would you nuike any (oiflflient on suggestions that ha ye been made, and some of which ha ~e 1 ~eeii discussed, a I)OUt the possibility of developiiig teacher aides to enal )le you to make immore effective use of scarce professionall traine(l teachers Mr. I h n:r. Yes. We are bogge(l clown now. \Ve have a shortage of tcachers now because of budget I imitat IOIIS. We have introdilce(l teachei aides iii I ( ) schools. We added three last week. We propose to add as quickly as possii~ie* teacher a!(les. We need help. W~e camil go ~() schools, but we are id eying teachers of tionteaching duties. Mr. Bi~A1)EM~s. Would von l)e sympathetic to Federal support to help you enable sonic of these teacher aides Mr. hour. I would. It would help us do it much faster. Mr. Bir~nEM~~s. ~1ou were about to make a comment on vocational educat i on a little earl icr. I clout know what you were go i hg to say, hut von might Say what von had ill rnin(i at this 1)Oiflt. Mr. HOLT. Mrs. Green's concern, one of our problems seems to me, in answer to Mr. l)ent, is that I think we have made. too many cabinets, uumore tha.n we need, perhaps, and one of the things we have not knowii is what are those things. because we have not studied them ~vell enough, pure and simple, auid it is our fault. We have not studied well enough to know what are the negotiable skills needed. Now how would I have known in my district that there wa~ a need for television production people, which the vocational teclniical institute is going into now I see a lot of beauty shops. How would I know that we need a great many more beauticians if the girls could be trained We had not studied. We need to make a stud and then get the programs, instead of what we have been doing. Mr. BRADEMAS. One other question and one observation. My obser- vation simply is that I have been struck by the fact that you leaders of middle-size American cities and school districts, most of you, have indicated strong support for the Teacher Corps, while yesterday the leaders of the great urban schools took the same position. The clay before that, the State superuitenclents of public instruetioii were in and also indicated their sympathy with this program. I)r. Tiolt, have on any comment to make on a very thorny problem for all of us. especially in the North, of de facto segregation iii schools That is a hinge one to throw at you, but have you any observation ? lit has not I)een touched upon in our hearings this morning. Mr. HOLT. Yes; this is, of course, a~ problem of great concern and one that. we spend as much time on at present as any other single 11)1 eni. In regard to these 5(110015 that tIme teachers go to, II would say that time most frustrating single problem I have today is to staff the schools where we have disadvantaged children. I simply have not been aide to do it 1 ecaiise. as I have ui icated, the exhierleined tea el~er has said, those wit im semi olity. I (11)11 1 wa mit 1 0 ~.ro to that school." The voting ones are i ot ((ji iipj ad t( teal w thu t lie )rol)lemu. Part and am reel of any pr h )l euui we ~ ec is t lie i alt ci of (1 e fecto: ~ui ~ouithu Bend, lor example. is a study ~if how the elicits. \vhmnt will lie die elleits. of aiuy actiomi we many take. PAGENO="0062" 884 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. BRADEMA~. I dont know how much time I have left, Mr. Chair- man. Chairmaii PERKINS. It has expired. Mr. BRADEMAS. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Reid. Mrs. GREEN. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. REID. 1 would be happy to yield. Mrs. GREEN. The superintendents testifying yesterday were asked if they supported the Teacher Corps and they said `Yes." I would like to direct the same question to you. Not if you support a Federal Teacher ( ~oips versus nothing. But, rather, if you had a choice I)e- tween receiving the same amount of funds to train your local teachers, or would ou prefer to have a National Teacher Corps that recruits and trains and helps to place teachers? What I am asking is would you like to do it yourself. Do you think you would have better quality of education and better teachers under one system than the other? Mr. HOLT. I would like to discuss that. I would rather have, I think, in view of the success of your recruiting program, the National Teacher Corps, for this reason: We still do not inspire, apparently, at the local level, the young people who feel a commitment to public serv- ice, as the Federal Teacher Corps has been able to do. I think it is astounding, the number of applicants you have had. We get nothing like that. Mrs. GREEN. How large would you like to have the National Teacher Corps Mr. HOLT. I tend to think in terms of South Be.nd, I suppose, Mrs. Green, at the moment. I would be willing to put local funds insofar as possible into this program. We are going to do it anyway. We have no choice. But I would like to have a supplement. How large it should be, I just don't know at the mornent~. Mrs. Gi~N. Would you have 5,000 members of the National Teach- Corps, 10,000 or 100,000? Mr. HOLT. I don't know. Perhaps 10,000 to do the job. Mrs. GREEN. I don't. want to take Congressman Reid's time, but do any of the rest of you wish to comment? Mr. HAZLET'r. Mrs. Green, I think one of the virtues of the Na~tional Teacher Corps idea is that it would tend to make a mammoth impact upon the attitudes of teacher training institutions who don't respond at the-when we at the local levels endeavor to join with us in some kind of program. I mentioned earlier that we have only one public college in the area that has ever endeavored to make any systematic attempt to train teachers to go into our inner city. We would, to answer a question raised earlier, subsidize interns from local money and consider them at the time of internship as being sub- professionals. Also, if we did that, we would like to find some way to permit them to become teachers upon certification in our area. I doift know any value out of the National Teacher Corps concept other than the fact that the entire country's attention would be focused on a need that has not been able to be overcome otherwise. PAGENO="0063" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS S85 Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Reid. Mr. REID. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First I would like to warmly welcome Dr. Hazlett, Dr. Breit, Dr. Johnson, and Mr. Stapleton, particularly l)r. ,Jolnison of White Plains, who, I believe, is doing an outstanding and creative job as superin- tendent of schools in White Plains in administering a number of these programs. Dr. Johnson, I certainly want to thank you for your detailed and thoughtful comments. I have a few specific questions I would like to direct to you, if I may. On page 13 of your testimony you refer to the very considerable overhead in administrative planning costs in- curred by State educational departments and local school systems par- ticipating in federally aided projects. One suggestion that has been made is not only to increase the amount of administrative funding for title II from 3 to 5 percent, but equally perhaps to have a sliding scale percentage available to the local school district too, so that, for example, on a large grant, 5 percent would be adequate for local administrative costs, whereas on a smaller grant, it. might be necessary to have 10 percent. \Vould you favor some sliding scale, too, of that kind to iiieer this problem? Mr. .Joiixsox. Yes, I would. Mr. REID. Second, with regard to the vocational education act. amendments, the act provides for original construction and initial equipment. Buildings suitable for vocational education are available in some places but. cannot be purchased. Would purchase of such buildings be desirable? In other words, not necessarily having to rely on original construction, but the use of other buildings that could be rehabilitated for vocational education purposes, would that be of assistance in White Plains ? Mr. JOhNSoN. `Ie.s, it \VOUl(l be, Mr. Reid. Chairman PERKINS. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mrs. GREEN. Could I ask unanimous consent to proceed a little longer? Chairman PERKINS. The gentleman-the gentlelady from Oregon asks unanimous consent that Mr. Reid be permitted to proceed for an additional 3 minutes. Is there objection? `Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. REID. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. Oregon is indeed generous. Dr. Johnson, I would also like to ask you now a broader question with regard t.o title I funding in general. With such specifics as you could supply with regard to White Plains-being an excellent illustration of the immediate city problems-as you know the Congress has authorized ~2.4 billion for fiscal 1968 in funding for title I pro- grams. The President's budget, however, only requests ~ billion. The question has been raised here in colloquy both with the Commis- sioner of Education, Dr. Howe, and the Secretary of hEW, John Gard- ner, whehther or not there should not be full funding for title 1. Dr. Gardner has indicated in his judgment that, as an educator, he would favor that, were it not for budgetary problems. He also stated his belief that. local school districts in a number of States, and I believe implicit, in that is New York, could take full PAGENO="0064" S86 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS advantage of full funding under title I where we have some of our lilost sen U~ prol )lenls of the educationally deprive(l. lii the case of White Plains or in Westchester or New York, gener- ally. waoiid von care to comment about the desirability of full funding as ~ ti ~e ~LlltIlOViZ~It iOu under title I? Mr. .Joux~a )N. (~Iiairnian Perkins, may I put in an aside, before 1 uiswei that. to say how much we appreciate, the fact that Congress- loan Reid has hrstiiand knowledge of these programs. 1 ~ visited tiìe ~1og~1ms with him, and it. is this kind of kiu)\viedge \vlui('lI I think is niost helpful to the Congress in realizing the value even more thaii what we. say. As you see these ~ and I an~ sure it is tine of all of von, and talk with p~li~e.nts, as (1on- 2nessuianj Rei(l does, as von ale in (lose contact. with the programs, I think Von can indeed see the value of them. I would favor, since there are many youngsters in title I that are I )~1ll~ a (led under title I, nianv others who need to be a ideci under title I who are not now being aided. We hive arbitrarily set ~ years of retardation. I am sure that in otliei ifl~ue~ iii the couhitrv they have had to set-if it is exclusively a readin~ program-a greater level of retardation. I would favor full liuianciiig to the extent of the amount. that you mentioned, and feel hat even that might not be adequate to do the job that ought to be done ~ h1~i'~~ up deficiencies in our educational programs. Mr. Riun. In the case of White Plains, just to be specific, compared ~vitli ivliat von now get under title I, could you roughly double that ? Mi. .T ii NsI x. We could prudently use twice. as much, Mr. Reid. Mr. REID. Thank you. (`liairnian PERKINS. The comment from you is very impressive in- sof~ir as I ani concerned because it has been alleged consistently from the time we starte.(l with that categorical approach that. Westchester County was a wealthy county and did not need assistance in that area.. 1 am impressed with your statement that you really could well utilize twice the amount of funds that you are receiving at the present tniie in Westchester County. If von did not receive the funding that. you are receiving under the bill at tile present tune, would it be possible to put. into operation these enr~chnieuit ~)rogran1s, special programs that. von have referred to here today? Mi. .1 ii N~ON. ~roin local funds? ( I iai ilnan PERKINS. Ie.s. Mr. .J ii NS( `N. I nder the present tax limitations it would not, sir. I pciined to the fact that in White Plains we have ~,OOO illiterates with which we are working tinder the NDT progran'is. About 20 pei~1t of Our population is. by definition, at the poieity level. ( `ha iunan PERKINS. About 20 percent ? Mi. .h tINS `N. `\es: that is in my community. ( `lniiniuaii PERKINS. And you consider then it is propel' to recognize ~~\`~1t~ \V~ enever it exists. regardless of t lie income level of W~e.st- ~hester (` univ. ~An! T ((1I('(t iii tin'tt a~sliniJ)tioui ? You feel that the formula we ha cc ii1 tel. putt in~ the funds wherever they have these. spots of and al \e:lcelta ill iiiiiiuh)er is proper. is that correct? PAGENO="0065" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 887 Mr. Jonxsox. My understanding is completely consistent with the objectives of the Congress: That you educate the youngster where he ~s, that von provide it whether he is in an affluent community or whether he is in other places. I think it ~S particularly wise also that you have permitted its, who have completely desegregated our schools, and have. a quota, that this program may go into each one of our schools and not be restricted to simply geographic area where poverty does exist. Chairman PEIHc1NS. I want to say that Ogden Reid iS always using this approach. He is one of our dedicated Members who has con- tributed much in the improvement of the legislation. Mr. Q~IE. Would the gentleman yield on that point? You know, New York is one of the wealthiest States in the Union. How does Westchester County rank with the other counties in New York? Mr. JoHNsoN. It would be in the upper two or three. Mr. QUTE. Probably in the upper one, too, wouldn't it, at times? WTeII, New York has been getting three times as much money per child as Mississippi. I happen to l)e one of those with the opinion that if it is the top two or three iii New York and New York is the richest State in the Union, there ought to be sufficient revenue there. We must be getting our money froni \Ve.stchiester County to send back up to Westchester County agaili. Mr. Joii~csox. WTe don't give very nmch of it back, however. Mr. BRADEMAS. In defense of our other colleagues, I would observe we have 10 minutes left. There are three members who have been here since 9 :30 and I would a.sk unanimous consent that each of them be permitted to question the witnesses for ~ minutes each. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Hathaway. Mr. I-IATHAWAY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There is one question I would like all of you to comment on. T hat is on categorical versus general aid to education. I would be interested in having your observations on it.. Mr. STAPLETON. I will make this general observation, that we have discussed this question and our feeling is somewhat that the cate- gorical has given us some target areas to focus on and that some of the programs we have developed, reading programs, what have you, all of the programs that again have been indicated here today, have been brought about to a certain extent by categorical mdcl. I recognize that many people would not agree with this, but. this is, as I say, something we discussed and felt. was a pius for categorical aid. We would want to show that as a point. Mr. HATHAWAY. Thank you very much. Mr. HAZLETr. I believe in beth the categorical and general aid. Categorical aid has the advantage of stimulating, I think, school systems on a national basis in terms of meeting certain national goals which might not otherwise be crystallized as being in the apparent need that they are. But I think also the, school s-ystems across the country need a ~en- eral uplift of meeting the ordinary demands of flll;ln(ing I)1l)iic schools. There is great need every where, I think, for restructuring the entire tax system that supports schools, traditionally on local real estate to a large extent. 4~2-~7--pt. 2------5 PAGENO="0066" 888 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS I would subscribe to both. Mr. HATBAWAY. Do you think title I as it stands now is sufficiently general in that respect? Mr. HAZLETT. Title I as categorical aid, limited to certain kinds of objectives and cannot be used t.o supplement the general operations of the school system. Mr. HOLT. I tend to agree with Mr. Hazlett in that I might support in certain areas both. I certainly think in the case of title I it is sufficiently general to deal with a problem that we must deal with at this moment. Perhaps there are some areas generally tha.t are not covered that I would like to see covered. But the Teacher Corps, again, the voca- tional. particularly the handicapped, those things that we want to do, I very much favor. Mr. BREIT. I think in the long run general aid is the preferable dire~t.ion to go. However, in the use of categorical funds you are in a position to emphasize. particular problems in the district that are critical and iii need of massive kinds of support. To that. extent. certainly, this has been a wonderful help to us. But I would not like t.o see it as a. plan for the future, that this is the way we meet our educational problems. Mr. HATHAWAY. Don't you think continued innovations are going to be necessary? Mr. B~srr. Yes, I think so, and I think the funds that have been issued in title III provide us a general overall application that is a little better as far as the local district is concerned than the title I. Title I is specifically geared to a specific kind of individual. Mr. .J0HNSOX. I would tend t.o agree in general. In the first place, over a period of time our schools have been in- adequately financially supported and we have great needs. Secondly, I would hope that over a long pe.riod of time the aid would become general. There have, been instances in categorical aid in the past where there has been concentration and matching funds required which has drained the money away from the mc.re general area of the humanities, general science, for example, as contrasted to the humanities. I would subscribe to what I feel to be your point, that innovation might. continue to be categorical aid, that over a period of time pro- posals might. come in in the. are.a of innovation which would continue to be financed. But. otherwise, general aid would have my support. MI'. HATHAWAY. Do you think we should still maintain title III? Mr. ,ToHxsoN. In the area of innovation, yes, I t.hink this should be well done. Mr. HATnx'~vAY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Gentlemen, thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Er]enborn. Mr. ERLENBORN. Let. me welcome all of you and thank you for your statements. Dr. I-Iazlett, it. is particularly good to see you again after our meet- ing last. December in Kansas City. On page 4 of your statement you mention that the Kansas City ~liool system was allocated $1,800,000 in fiscal 1966. Could you tell me, if you recall, how much of t.hat. was actually spent? PAGENO="0067" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 889 Mr. HAZLETr. We, as I recall, spent J)rac.ticallv the bulk of it. Mr. ERLENBORN. When did your program begin? As I recall, ~1scal 1966 was the first year of ESEA and it was not authorized nor were the allocations made until-well, the authorization was late fall of 1965 and allocations I don't believe were made until early 1966. Mr. HAZLE~rP. We began our programing in March 1966. Mr. ERLENBORN. In March of 1966? Mr. ITAZLE'IT. And continued through August 1966. Mr. ERLENBORN. And in that period of time von spent approxi- inately ~1,8OO,OOO, is that correct? Mr. HAZLETT. Yes, part of that was due to the authorization of an addition to the school that was crowded to reduce class size. Mr. ERLENBORN. Can you tell me approximately what percentage of that was spent on either construction or the acquisition of physical matter, teaching a.ids and so forth? Mr. HAZLErr. The construction was approximately one-third. I don't have any figures with respect to the purchase of equipment, but there was a substantial amount. There was a mammoth summer school activity. Then through March, April, and May we incorpo- rat.ed within our designated schools and started the programs which we continued on t.hen in fiscal 1967. Mr. ERLENBORN. Do you feel beginning the program in March and carrying it through August you were able to really use these funds in an economical manner, or was there across the country, not just point- ing the finger at Kansas City, a good deal of waste as a result of the fa.ct that this arrived so late in the year? Mr. I{AZLErr. I think there is bound to be waste and inefficient utilization of funds unless they can be available early enough to incor- porate in a plan starting at the beginning of the school year. Mr. ERLENBORN. Many other areas, my own State of Illinois, for instance, felt t.hat they could not spend these funds in an economical manner, that they could not get value from them. They did not spend the full authorization or allocation the first year. In the second year we then found that the appropriations had a proviso that no State would be allocated below the level at which they spent the first year. I think you are familiar with this. I understand that that same proviso will be in the appropriations bill this year. Do you think it. is fair to those States that felt they were doing a job of weeding out. profitable programs, which had no real oppor- tunity to spend funds successfully and, therefore, save the taxpayers' money in the first, year, to be hampered an(l penalized as a result Mr. HAZLETT. Very definitely that-I think t.hat is true. Mr. ERLENBORN. It is just. not fair, is it? Mr. HAZLETr. No, it is not fair, because in the exercise of prudence and good judgment they are being penalized. Mr. ERLENBORN. Dr. Johnson, you mentioned, and I think this touches on the same point, that we should not just spend money because it is available, and must be. spent before ihe authorization expires. W~oulcl you agree with some of the observations that Dr. T-Tazlett made or maybe that I have led him into making? Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, I would agree. My statement was that if you were to spend money in Septeniber, prudentl, wisely, and to the best PAGENO="0068" 890 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS of advantage, you ~hou1d have authorization so you rail go out and employ teachers and buy supplies and materials, to plan for alterations of rooms in many instances. This cannot be done on short notice. If you insist on spending the money prudently, you must have authorization well in advance of the time you begin to pay the money out. Mr. ERLENBORN. Let me address this to all of you. I think you realize the present authorization carries us through fiscal 1968 and the Office of Education presently has no plans this year to ask for addi- tional authorization in fiscal 1969. Do you feel that. we are headed down the road again of late fundmg, and does this worry you? Mr. Joiixsox. We are heading down the road, sir, of late funding, and it worrieS me. Mr. HOLT. 1 have recently come from Arizona and I was concerned as to what would happen to the Indians. I am happy to see that they are extende(l to l96~ now. Chairman PERKiNs. It would give von more assurance if we put in at least a ~-ve.ar duration to the authorization with t.he hope that the Cumin itt cc on Appropriations would appropriate early, several nioiiths before the be.giiuiing of the fiscal year? Mr. BRETT. Yes, this is a matter of real concern to us, particularly iii securing the adequate personnel. You simply must do this in the early spring of the year. Chairman PERKINS. We hope that you can help us make that point this year before the. House Committee on Appropriations. I hope this committee, iii extending this program, can cure the criticism. You must have, an idea of your budgets early. You may impress the I'Touse C onim ittee on Appropriations. It is my understanding that they have hearings this year running into April. If some of you want to come down and put in an appear- alice before the. House Committee on Appropriations, I would think it would be helpful for them to see the picture we are getting here. Mr. FORD. Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Ford. Mr. FORD. Gentlemen, last year when we were reviewing the first year of operations of the bill we had some principal State school officers who had stated that. the had difficulty in title I with an overloading of equipment requests. In other words, in their opinion in their particular State the people making tip the title I applications had used a much larger percentage of their money for hardware. But. in general the prediction was made that t.his would change, that. in the initial years there would be heavy hardware expenditures and as time went. by this would represent a sharply decreasing 1)ercentage of the expenditure of title. I funds. In the past couple of days it has become apparent that there is within the Congress and within this committee some feeling that perhaps too much of title I money is heinz used for eqiiipmeuit. and that von are really not doing much more than that. I~ the pre(lictioiT that was made a year ago that this would drop off shiaiply coming through or not ? PAGENO="0069" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 891 \Vhat do you see as the trend in this respect with iesl)eCt to title I funds Chairman PERKINS. I think it would be fine to let them all comment on that question. Mr. ~TApLEToN. I will make a brief comment that at. least in our meetings in Xew Mexico, and in recent meetings earlier th1s year, we have had some guidance and some trend setting that would indicate we were to look at programs, to look at personnel, and even to look at curriculum study, and not hardware facility. I would indicate, as I look at. our totals here and our breakout that there has been, obviously, some equipment, but there has been an emphasis and a reemphasis on moving toward program development with regard to persoiinel, curriculum, and study, and this type of thing. Mr. HAZLETr. I don't. have with me the specific figures, but I am positive that the second year of expenditures has been spent on *p~rsoll- nel, on program development, and that. there has been a mimmum a mount of equipment. purchased. It' is true in the first year, partly because personnel were not avail- able at the time funding was made, we recognized much of the equip- ment could be carryover for subsequent years. I would be glad to supply the exact figures, but I know the. trend is less on equipment. by a great percentage. Mr. Jonxsox. Our experience is the same. We spent heavily on equipment., supplies, and materials of this kind in the first yea.r be- cause we received the allocation well after the year had started, be- cause we did not have the staff to put. into our remedial and clinical reading program. In the current year. very little is being spent on equipment or so- called hardware. It is being spent almost. exclusively for program in our community. Mr. HOLT. I think it. should be said that we a.re much more sophisti- c.a.ted consumers of hardware than we were the first year. We now know what it will do and consequently we a.re buying less. Mr. B~IT. The first year, for all the reasons mentioned, we had sub- stantial expenditures in equipment, I think around $300,000 out of $1,600,000 and our budget for this year does not include any budget for equipment. Mr. FORD. I want. to thank you for that unanimous opinion because it will go far to dispel the effect. of simply quoting percentages during the first and second year for hardware, and to try to draw from that the conclusion that title I has not stimulated you people very much in terms of special programs and special personnel for the problem we are trying to reach. I have one brief question and you can all comment., if you will. WTe have had suggestions here as an alternative, although there is no legis- lation pending that suggests the alternative, that rather than have a Teacher Corps as it is conceived in this legislation, we might better just. take the same amount of money and divi(le it out among time school districts across the country and heave you to your own devices in terms of teacher training of some sort. Some of us are very eager to draw again on the very good experi- ence of VISTA and the Peace Corps, ill a program where people under- PAGENO="0070" 892 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS take speeial training with a precommit.ment to the ultimate goal of working with a specific type of student under specific circumstances, as contrasted with the teacher who enters the school system waiting until he can get enough seniority to get into the nicer school in the nicer neighborhood. Do you think if we were to spread this money out thinner, by going to all of the school districts with some form of just general teacher training funds, that we would be likely to be able to put together the same kind of group of people with its prededication to go into the specific tough areas that. we are trying to reach with the Teacher Corps? I)o you think the kinds of pressures you normally have from your teacher organizations, your parent organizations, your school boards and others, would allow you to use teacher money that was not targeted towards this particular project for the very limited kind of person that we are after, not limited in their resources but limited in terms of where we might se.nd them? Mr. HOLT. As I indicated in my statement, I am really impressed with your recruitment up to this point. I think the commitment in the Federal Corps for the people of this type is much greater than we could hope to get. I would say at this time I would rather see the National Teacher Corps than have the money to recruit our own. I think you are more successful to get people for this particular purpose. Mr. HAZLETT. Mr. Ford. I believe we need the National Teacher Corps because we need the large image built up in the country which additional concepts like this would assist the local districts with. I have tried for several years to get our teacher training institu- tions to work with us in training people particularly for the inner city, and have found the response not forthcoming. To describe what might be kind of a parallel, if you went into the extended teacher fellowship program under the Higher Education Act, I don't believe any of the colleges and universities have shown the initiative in devel- oping particular programs to aid in the teaching in substantive areas, the training of counselors and that sort of thing. So I think the push that comes from the National Teacher Corps would be of great value in 4 or 5 years. After that it might be obso- lescent. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Dellenback. Mr. DELLENBAcK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Would you yield for one short moment.? Mr. DELLENBACK. Certainly. Chairman PERKn~s. It would be most difficult for me to visualize, following the first couple of questions Mr. Ford asked, why any re- sponsible people charged with the administration of schools would purchase equipment or hardware that could not be well utilized by the schools in the district. Do you know of any answer as to why they would do that? I have not heard of any criticism of that type coming before the Committee. I know in the first year many of the school people invested heavily in hardware because they did not have time to make other plans. But the evidence reported t.hus far disposes of that. It was, for example, types of audio-visual equipment and other equipment that could well be utilized in the local school system. PAGENO="0071" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 893 Is tha.t the way you have viewed the situation? Mr. STAPLETON. Mr. Chairman, our experience on the equipment purchased, the decisions to purchase certain kinds of equipment, for the laboratories or whatever the case may be., were still sound deci- sions. We had a gap and the gap was in service education and work- ing with teachers. But this was just a matter of time. We continue to work on this constantly. Chairman PERKINS. I know that gap existed in easterii Kentucky, where they were not able to fully utilize these items at times because of a lack of competent, personnel. Mr. Dellenback. Mr. DELLENBACK. Let me ask this question, if I may, and it follows down again on this point of Teacher Corps versus training teachers yourself. As a background to this, let me say when a question was put this way to your colleagues from the larger cities who testified yesterday, the majority of them spoke in terms of preferring to train their own teachers if t.he choice were between self-training and Teac.her Corps. So recognizing there is not time for depth in discussion, putting the question this way, if the funds were to be made available, to you to train your own teachers as an alternative to using Teacher Corps as a. training system, which would you prefer-the gentleman from New Mexico first-would you prefer to use those funds for training your own teachers or would you prefer to have those funds use.d for a Teacher Corps? Mr. STAPLETON. I guess I can speak on both sides of this question. Mr. DELLENBACK. Unfortunately t.here is not time. Mr. STAPLETON. I will just indicate that because of the same. rea- sons given earlier by my colleagues in order to dramatize the need and the special programs required for t.he massive infusion of personnel for these programs, at least my feeling would be that I would see the need for the Teacher Corps. Mr. DELLENBACK. And Dr. Hazlett, you have spoken to that. ques- tion. You prefer the Teacher Corps? Mr. HAZLErr. I would prefer it.. We could not train our teachers without the cooperation of universities. Mr. DELLENBACK. We are not plowing here the ground tha.t was plowed yesterday. I read most of your answer as saying because. of what happened before and you were not able to get this cooperat.ion, you therefore would prefer it. But that has been plowed. Now in light of the situation, you would still prefer the Teacher Cor~ps to self-trained? Mr. HAZLETr. As I envision t.he training; yes. Mr. DELLENBACK. Mr. Johnson? Mr. JOHNSON. Locally, for myself and my district, I would prefer the funds. On a national basis, I think the national interest, would be better served by the National Teacher Corps. Mr. DELLENBACK. My question is for von and your district, that you know best. Mr. JOHNSON. For my own sit.uation, for my community, I would prefer to have the. funds and to set up a program of teacher training in collaboration with one of t.he colleges and universities. PAGENO="0072" 894 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. DELLEXBACK. Dr. Holt, s-ou have, spoken in favor of the Teacher Corps. I l)elieve. Mr. HOLT. Yes. And, again, from my district. arid speaking for us I would prefer the Teacher Corps. Mr. DELLENBACK. Even for your district? Mr. HOLT. Yes Mr. DELLENBACK. And Seattle? Mr. BRETT. In Seattle, we. would prefer to handle it ourselves. Mr. DELLENBAcK. You then divide with three of you preferring the Teacher Corps and two of you joining the majority of your colleagues yesterday in preferring self-education. Dr. Johnson, von were asked by my colleague from Oregon, Mrs. Green. a. question about if on had something like $8,000 per person what would von do as an alternative to the Job Corps. As a preliminary, let me ask you t.his: Do you know how many young people from your district are in the Job Corps at the present time, people taken out of your area and put into Job Corps camps? Mr. JOHNSON. Do you mean going out from our schools? Mr. DELLENBACK. Out of your area and put in Job Corps camps somewhere. Mr. .JoIrNsox. I don't believe very many, if any, have left our schools. We do have it on the job training in collaboration with local industry. Mr. DELLENBACK. The question, as put., is not a particularly fair question because there would not be many $8,000 per person made available to you to train the people w-ho are being helped by Job Corps camps at the present time. Mr. JonNsoN. On the contrary, I might cite a ]ocai institut.ion called The Cage and this is the youngsters who are on the border- line of society who have been alleged to be dope addicts, who are well luiown by police, who are out of school. We have a project now going to the State education department for funding to try to work with these youngsters. They are not in high school. They are of high school age. We are going to, if we get this funded, go into the cage, which is their habitat, and provide education for them. Ultimately we hope to lead them back to school. There are many of the youngsters of this type who are out of school who we could use and house in a program of the kind Mrs. Green envisions. Mr. DELLENBACK. What. you are saying as I read you, Dr. Johnson, is that if funds in any quantity were to be made available to you you could use them well in reaching a group that seriously needs help. Mr. JoHNsON. We believe so: yes, sir. Mr. DELLENBACK. But those would not be the same young people who at the present. time are being reached by the Job Corps? Mr. JOHNSON. I have to distinguish and, in a measure, ~uivocate. We have youngsters in the Job Corps working in contract with local agencies, the Urban League, for instance, and we are taking these youngsters and employing them but they are not in sciaool and we are not providing them with education. Many of them are out of school. It. is this kind of youngster that we would like to have this SS,000 to use on. PAGENO="0073" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 895 Mr. DELLENBACK. I SU~~OSe there is not any of the. five districts here involved that would not like massive infusions of Federal funds if this were to be in addition to everything that is now given to you. May I ask again, please, a simple question, trying to make it "yes" or "no" around the horn. Do you, speaking for your district, favor title V, the strengthening of State departments, in your specific States? Mr. STAPL~rON. Yes. Mr. HAZLETT. Without any question; yes. Mr. JoHNsoN. Yes. Mr. HOLT. Yes, sir. Mr. BRETT. Yes, a strong endorsement. Mr. DELLENBACK. All five of you are unanimous in feeling that St ate departments should be strengthened. Again, and oversimplifying, all of us working under the gun of time and oversimplification, do you feel that future emphasis in this field of Federal-State-local should be primarily on an improvement in Federal-State relationship, or do you feel that the primary em- phasis should be on improvement and increase of Federal-local-dis- trict relationship? May I again ask around the horn? This is an either/or that is somewhat false because the answer could l)e that they should both be. To the degree we choose one at the expense of the other, does your vote come down in favor of primary emphasis on improving Federal-St ate or primary emplia sis omi improving Federal- local? Mr. STAPLETON. I wish we had time to speak to a three-way partner- ship, but in the context of your question, State-local. Mr. DELLENBACK. You mean Federal-local. I put the question on the relationship of Federal to building the Federal-State relationships so that. then the State deals with the local, versus the Federal dealing directly with the local and bypassing the State. Mr. STAPLETON. I would favor building t.he relationship between the Federal and the State.. Mr. IIAZLETT. In view of your last remarks. I would say "yes." Mr. JoHNsoN. To be consistent with my previous answer I would have to say Federal-State. Mr. HOLT. Federal-State. Mr. BEEFy. I would say Federal-St ate, with the. exception of title III, which I would like to see continued as Federal-State-district relationship. Mr. DELLENBACK. `We could all dwell at some hen~thi on the rami- fications of this question. but in the stripped-down analysis I tried to bre.ak it. into a simple question. I appreciate your answers. Speaking for those who have been here and have, left, we do appre- ciate you gentlemen coming, some of you coming from a particularly long distance. This type of testimony is ver helpful to us as we seek to do what. we ought to be doing on our side of the desk. Chairman PERKINS. I regret that. the other minority memi)erS were not present to hear the questions put to the witnesses by Mr. Delle.n- bac.k. Mr. DELLENBACK. I am interested in the fact that. the membership ebbs and flows. In the back of my mind I am making a. mental note PAGENO="0074" S96 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS as to how many sit on this side of the aisle and listen to these questions and to tlie~ profound answers. (`ha ~rman PERKINS. Mr. Ford? Mr. Fou~. Mr. Chairman, I was very happy to hear my colleague's questions about the Job Corps. He put his finger Ofl a very sensitive point that tins committee will go into, not with this particular piece of legislation but with another one that is coming along. I am on the subcommittee that wrote this legislation in the past couple of years. with the chairman. A tight has been developed over there over the concept of the Job Corps which seeks to remove a par- ticular type of fellow from his home environment. I could give you a profile. We may or may not. have a large number of them. I don't have very many of these people in the district I represent, although I have some very poor people. The. surroundings that the poor people live in. in my district, are far superior t.o most. of the areas that the Job Corps recruits come from. I don't suggest. it is better to be poor in good surroundings than in bad, but a lot of the pressure.s that these kinds have on them before they come to the Job Corps don't. exist in a suburban t.ype area. like I represent. I don't mean to confuse this with the Neighborhood Youth Corps, which is a program for the in-school and out-of-school youth. I thought. that is what the gentleman from White Plains was describing as the program he was cooperating with now, the out-of-school Neigh- borhood Youth Corps. One of the concepts under fire in the Congress is the concept of putting boys in a camp type of arrangement which some of the members of Congress characterize as being semimilitary, though it is a long way from that. We find a very marked difference in our success with these kids. Quite frankly, as a defender of the Corps I have to admit we have a lot of problems. We find marked difference in our success between the conservation centers, where the boys are closer t.o the CCC type operation than with some of the urban centers where we have more diversity in the kinds of things we try to teach them. But the defenders of the Job Corps say that one of the great gains we make even with a boy who drops out is that for a short time he is in a new environment where there is a new set of personal disciplines made available to him. Eating regularly, getting along with a group, and doing all of these things are not possible when he leaves the training area. Do you think that the boy out. of the. big cities' slums or out of the extreme rural poverty of some of the sections of Appala- chia. would be reached by a program that. was operated in the local school district the same as when it reaches him in the Job Corps? Mr. BREIT. I had the occasion to visit a Job Corps center in Idaho, which is a conservation type, and I thought the program there was very effective. As a matter of fact, we have six teachers currently working wit.h the Job Corps there. I would think the overall picture would be that it would probably be a better program, such as the con- servation program I visited there, if that were continued, although in conjunct.ion with that we are planning to set up in our school system next. year a Job Corps center for our own youngsters, not, from other communities or other cities. PAGENO="0075" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 897 Mr. FORD. Will this be residential? Mr. B~IT. They will all live in the town. Mr. FORD. They will still live in whatever home they have? Mr. BREIT. Yes; eventually we could develop, and we have this in the future as a possibility, a residential type, but it would only be for our own students. We think there is a lot of potential in that. Mr. JOHNSON. To be effective in the long range there has to be an educational foundation and the collaborative efforts which have taken place, where there is an educational foundation. In the efforts to even get these youngsters back in school, it is the most prudent ex- penditure of Federal funds. The end is not to keep the youngsters out, but to t.ake him and in- duce him to come back to school. Then to ultimately give him enough education whatever environment you may find him in, so that havin had a taste of education he will be willing to come back to school an see the need of it. Mr. HAZLErr. I have two opinions and they are just opinions. One is if it is desirable that there be a new and st.ructured type of environ- ment for these youngsters to permit some observance of their habits, that could be acheived locally in a. residential-type setup. Secondly, it would seem t.o me that one of the objectives would be to gradually cause these individuals to assume a place in a normal kind of setting in terms of jobs and living with their neighbors. It might be better effective if it could be done in the area where they live. If you could come and combine both of these in a residential setting and a gradual moving into the community, it would be wiser. Chairman PERKINS. I want to thank all of you gentlemen for your appearance this morning. A quorum has sounded. If agreeable, as many of you as can please return for further questioning. You are being most helpful to the committee. Your testimony certainly en- lightens the committee in preparing this legislation. I hope I am not imposing on you too much. If I am, and if any of you have to leave this afternoon and cannot conveniently be present, of course you have that right, too. The committee will be in recess until 2 p.m. (Whereupon, at 12 :30 p.m. the committee recessed, to reconvene at 2 p.m. the same day.) AFTER RECESS The committee reconvened at I :~7 p.m.. lion. Cail I). Perkins, chairman of the committee, presiding.) Chairman PERKINS. The committee will come to order. I feel that all the members, perhaps, have had the oI)portunitv to interrogate the witnesses, so I have only a few questions, and then I will excuse you, if someone does not. walk in within the next S or 6 minutes. I would like to ask Dr. Breit. and have the comment of you other two gentlemen, whether you feel that if you had a general Federal aid program, as a complete substitute for the cat.egorical approach, that we now have under title I. involving the same amount of money, do you feel that the disadvantaged would rea.p the benefits to the extent they are now receiving benefits under title I of ESEA? Mr. BRETT. Well, I suppose this would depend on the handling of the funds by the local schools. PAGENO="0076" 898 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Chairman PERKINS. I mean, if we just turned it over to the States to handile. Mr. BRETT. Yes. I think nw own reaction would be no, that under categorical aid, where it is specified for specific uses, then you do apply it to those critical areas and you use it there. If the same amount of money that is now going into title I came as general aid, I doubt that you would get the same degree of concentration. It probably would be spread over a wider area. Chairman PERKINS. Let me have your comment on it. Mr. HAzI~vr. Yes, I would agree that there would not be the emphasis on educating the disadvantaged, under a general Federal aid program. It. is a radical concept that is causing many of us to re- examine some of our basic philosophies, really, with respect to the Possibilities of education. Mr. STAPLETON. I would agree with my colleagues here. WTe obvi- ously would still face, under general aid, the decision of priorities, and I have a feeling that there might be a different ranking of priori- ties, a diffusion of participation of them, which I think the majority- Chairman PEmn~Ixs. Do you feel that if we had this same amount of honey going into the States from the Federal level, as complete substitute, that the State authorities would not reach the disadvantaged children to the extent they are now being reached under ESEA, and that they would spend their funds for teachers' salaries, and other State obligations and they would not emphasize the disadvantaged as they are now being emphasized under ESEA? Mr. HAZLEYF. I believe that we would not get the same kind of emphasis on the disadvantaged. There. would be some diffusion. Chairman PEnKINS. Now a couple of other questions. Do you feel that we are placing this money under title I of ESEA to the greatest possible advantage at the presemTt. time, considering the needs at the elementary-secondary level Mr. BRETT. Yes. I think the direction of this categorical aid to the low-income-family youngsters, those of limited cultural backgrounds, is well placed. I think it is money well spent. Mr. J-TAzr~ETT. Well, under the objective of the elimination of pov- erty. ai~d providing education for these disadvantaged, I think it is being placed correctly. Mr. STAPLETON. I believe that. it. is being placed correctly. I am made mindful of the fact. that perhaps our district, other districts, perhaps, shouhl view the research available today, and do a little more in terms of saturating at. the earlier grades. *We have heard comments to the effect that we have had patchwork, remedial work, at. later stages, in secondary, and while I believe that these programs are necessary, and that. we. need to continue them, and have good programs at other levels, I believe there needs to be a concern for saturation of services for the disadvantaged, under this program. at. the earlier grades. Chairman PERKINS. Is it your experience that we only have enough money for programing purposes under title I available a.t the present time. and do not. l~ave funds available adequate for school construction PAGENO="0077" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 899 Mr. BRETT. Well, under the present title I program. we have used no money for school construction. It has all been for mostly per- sonnel, and we could use twice the amount that we are getting. Chairman PERKINS. If you had another billion dollars, in addition to the funds now available under title I of ESEA, how would you rec- ommend to the Congress that the extra million dollars from the Fed- eral level be expended? Mr. BRETT. WTe11, I think the first emphasis and concentration should be on program, and then insofar as you need facilities to- Chairman PERKINS. I did not get the first part of the answer. Mr. BRETT. I would say the emphasis on the use of funds should be on the program for the children, and then if you need facilities to aug- ment that program, to implement it, there shou1d be this privilege and opportunity to use some of the money in that direction, but I think the focal points should be on programs and services to children, as your first use of the funds. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Mr. HAZLETT. Well, most of our schools for the disadvantaged are also among our more crowded schools. It would be desirable if we could have funds to be replace outworn buildings, and also provide more classrooms to reduce the class size in the area being served. However, I would consider that secondary to program development. Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Go ahead. Mr. STAPLETON. My reaction to this would be that program develop- ment obviously comes first. However, I am made mindful of the fact that we cannot separate a quality program or qualitative program from the various components that make up a quality program, which would be l)ersonnel. Chairman PERKINS. I am sorry. Restate that. Mr. STAPLETON. I was just stating that I personally feel that ob- viously one would make program the priority, but I find it hard to distinguish between progra.m development or a quality program and the various components or ingredients that go into making that pro- gram, starting with, of course, quality teaching or quality personnel, quality material support, quality conditions of work, quality facilities. I am made aware of the fact, also, however, that there. is a subtle area., and as a curriculum awl instructions pe~~on charged with that specific job, I feel that we need program money which would get at methodology, and this type of thing, as opposed to buildings, but I would not make it. an either,/or situation. Chairman PERKINS. I think I will recess. I know- some of you want to leave pretty soon, and the other members, it would appear, have had the opportunity, and we have an important bill on the floor this after- noon, and perhaps they will not be back, but let me thank all of you for coining here today, and helping the committee. Your testimony has been most helpful. And cert a july. it. has gone a. long ways, in my judgment. to ~)oi11t lug ill) the need for the Tea1~er Corps. And the city supei'iiteudents. 1 v and huge. have endorsed the. Teacher Corps. This did not. occur 2 years ago. Of course. there are some amendments to it, in the proposal this year. PAGENO="0078" 900 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS It makes me feel that our hearings have been very constructive. Not only that, but the operation of the Elementary-Secondary Act in general. You people, you educators, have come before use with illustrations, and have evaluated the different titles, which to my way of thinking will go a long ways relieving the Congress of much crit- icism, because many programs have been criticized that evidence shows are operating very effectively in the country today. I want to thank you all for coming. Thank you very much. Mr. Biu~IT. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. I hope that it will not be the last time. I know some of you have been before the committee before, and I hope you will continue to help us in the future. Mr. JoHNsON. Thank you. (Whereupon, at 2 :10 p.m., the committee adjourned, subject to call of the Chair.) PAGENO="0079" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUATION AMENDMENTS OF 1967 FRIDAY, MARCH 10, 1967 HoUsE OF REPEESENTATIVES, Co~IMrrrEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR, Washington, D.C. The committee met at 9 :30 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Carl D. Perkins (chairman of the committee) presiding. Present: Representatives Perkins, Green, Dent., Brademas, Erlen- born, Scherle. l)ellenback, Esch, and Steiger. Staff members present: Robert E. McCord, senior specialist; H. D. Reed, Jr., general coimsel; William I). Gaul. associate general counsel: Benjamin F. Reeves, editor; and Louise M. Dargans, research assistant.. Chairman PERKINS. The committee will be in order. A quorum is present. This morning I will ask the members to refrain from questions until all the witnesses have made their state- ments. First I will call on Sister Miriam J. Farrell, supervisor, archdio- cesan schools, Gilroy, Calif. STATEMENT OP SISTER MIRIAM J. FARRELL, SUPERVISOR, ARCHDIOCESAN SCHOOLS, GILROY, CALIF. Chairman PERKINS. You may proceed with your statement at t.his time, Sister. Sister FARRELL. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, let me identify myself. I am Sister Miriam Joseph Farrell, a member of the Sisters of the Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, whose headqua.rters are in San Francisco, Calif. I have been supervisor of elementary schools in the archdiocese of San Francisco, Calif. Currently I am supervisor principal in Gilroy, Calif., and member of a commission, set up by my religious community for the study of our role in education. I have been involved with ESEA-Public Law 89-10-as a mem- ber of the Advisory Committee on Supplementary Educational Cen- ters and Service-title ITT-established pursuant to section 30(i of Public Law 89-10 and I have participated with my public school counterparts in Gilroy, Calif.-a rural area south of San Francisco- in implementing both title I and title II. As a member of the title III advisory committee, may I take this opportunity to present the following observations: 901 PAGENO="0080" 902 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Because of staff and budget limitations, the division of plans and supplementary centers has not been able to achieve a satisfactory response to the request of the advisory committee relative to site visitations to determine reliability and validity of project requests, an(l l-)ostal)1)roval visits to determine the effectiveness of the project. That the State role in title III continue to be that of advisory to the F.S. Commissioner of Education. The need for support and development of education centers, each serving its own region and forming one link in a nationwide network of centers. It. is a. distinct pleasure for me to appear before you this morning t.o discuss and support the administration's legislative proposals as embodied in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act Amend- ments of 196~, H.R.. 6230. Before I enter into that discussion and express that support, how- ever. I should like to commend this committee for its very positive con- tribution to the entire spectrum of American education as evidenced in the historic Public Law 80-10. Further. I want to assure you that from my experience what you envisioned is being fulfilled-not perfectly, but in significant strides. It was to be expected that. legislation as revolutionary and of such magnitude as ESEA would meet with prol)Iems. However, if the spirit, that initiated it prevails, it cannot but be an effective vehicle in improving all of American e(lucation. One factor in the successful implementation of ESEA is the staff of the F.S. Office of Education. The people I have had the privilege to work with in that Office have been both highly competent and genuinely professional. Permit me. Mr. Chairman. to address myself to H.R. 6230, a bill to strengthen and improve programs of assistance for elementary and secondary education. In ~eneral. on the basis of experience, the proposals it embodies re- flect a necessary evolution of Public Law 80-10 in the pursuance of both quality eclucat ion and educational opportunities. I would strongl support the extension and expansion of the Na- tional Teacher Corps program for the following reasons: The unprecedented shortage of teachers, especially in urban slums and depressed rural areas, is a matter of record. We. need trained, creative, committed teachers to work with the disadvantaged. The concept of teacher-intern is realistic. Our present culture is such that. this type of dedication can be made attractive to young people who impound a vast reservoir of talent. and willingness to serve. My current experience in a migratory area applauds your extension of this pro~rnm to migrant groups. This would not only benefit the children of mi~ratorv workers. Tt would enable the local school sys- tem-i~i this instance, the Gilroy Tjnifiedl District-to improve its sta- bilit.v and its effectiveness in the education of the children of the per- manent. community. I would likewise support. the amending of title V (ESEA) to include statewide educational planning. Qualit.v educa- tion and the needs of children necessitate rational and complete planning. PAGENO="0081" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 903 The coordination this implies would, hopefully, improve present programs and develop new ones. Planning is one aspect of education that is best carried out within a State-local relationship. The Federal Government is hereby fulfilling its role by assisting all educational agencies in developing comprehensive systems of both plannmg and evaluation. I have highlighted specifically the National Teacher Corps and coin- prehei~sive planning. I would like to, generally, support H.R. 6~30's proposals regarding innovation in vocational education and expanded educational opportunities for handicapped cliii ciren. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I have kept this testi- mony relatively concise and to points within my competence. I stand ready to attempt to answer any questions you might want to put to me. Let me assure you of my vital and compelling interest in our Nation's education needs, and of my awareness that congressional action is needed to keep American education moving forward. Thank you, gentlemen, for this opportunity. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much, Sister Farrell, for an excellent statement. We will refrain from asking questions until we hear from all the witnesses in order to conserve time. Our next witness is Dr. Andrew P. Torrence, dean of academic affairs, Tuskegee Institute, Tuskegee., Ala.. STATEMENT OF DR. ANDREW P. TORRENCE, DEAN OF ACADEMIC AFFAIRS, TUSKEGEE INSTITUTE, TUSKEGEE, ALA. Mr. TORRENCE. Mr. Chairman, members of the House Education and Labor Committee, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1905, whose underlying purpose is to strengthen and improve the Nation's schools at the precollege level, is one of the most significant pieces of education legislation ever passed by the Congress of the United States. The need for this legislation is patently obvious, and the best efforts of all Americans are required if its necessary and wide-ranging pro- grams are to succeed. Most important to supplying the adequately trained manpower which our Nation needs for an ever-changing 011(1 complex society is the further strengthening of the foundation of education at the. ele- ment a ry and Secon(la ry levels. In a 4-year study of some 10,000 high school gra(luates, Lel and Med- ske.r and James Trent of the Center for i~eseaich and I)evelopment in Higher Education found that, nearly 40 percent. of the. students clearly possessing college ability-upper two-fifths of their high school gradu- ating classes-did not enter college. Their study raises this point : While we continue to expand the opportunities for higher education, what. can we do to devote further attention to an exploration of the question of the motivation of voui~ people who might now go to college but who chose, for a varfety of reasons, not to? Obviously, one of the answers lies in better teaching and counseling and of students in the precollege years and the provision of the breadth 75-492 `i--it. 2 PAGENO="0082" 904 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS and quality of programs which will instill in our young people the love for learning-and to do this in an atmosphere winch is conducive to learning. ESEA is sharply focused to achieve these goals. Each title under the act is important and necessary; however, I shall direct my remarks specifically to Title III: Supplementary Educa- tional Centers and Services. I have an especial interest in this title because (1) I serve as a member of its advisory committee and (2) and perhaps of much more consequence, I believe this title holds unusual promise for improving the quality of education in our ele- mentary and secondary schools. The present legislation serves three basic functions: (1) to stimulate and assist in the development and establishment of exemplary ele- mentary and secondary school educational programs to serve as models for regular school programs; (2) to improve education by enabling a community to provide educational and cultural services not now available to the children and adults who live there; and (3) to raise the quality of educational services offered. It permits, even encourages, the schools to experiment with innova- tive practices and to question the appropriateness of present curri- culum-its organization, sequence, quality and quantity. This is, perhaps, the first attempt at wide ranging efforts to bring creativity and innovation into programs at this level of the American educa- tional enterprise. The February 1967 issue of American Education sums up the ac- complishments of programs under title III during the past year: By encouraging the efforts of schoolmen to translate the results of educational research into classroom practice, Title III has enabled schools across the country to offer their students everything from teach teaching and mobile art galleries to special programs for the emotionally disturbed. And while Congress authorized $100 million for the title in 1966, only $75 million was actually appropriated. The amendments to this act will broaden title III at several points: The provision of additional funds for the territories, for Indian school of the Department of the Interior, and for Department of De- fense schools overseas. In his message, President Johnson requested "seed money for planning innovative school construction to deal with overcrowding, obsolescence, and segregation." He proposed that beginning in fiscal 1968 the school districts would be able to apply title III funds toward such critical educational needs as preschool education and replacing inadequate facilities. From studies which point up the weaknesses of our elementary and secondary schools and the many evidences of low motivation of high school graduates in pursuing college careers, the need for the continua- tion and expansion of this title is quite clear. Likewise many statistics, reports, and studies show the importance of this legislation's being adequately financed, administered, and di- rected a.t the Federal level. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 states: No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subject to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. PAGENO="0083" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 905 There has been blatant op~)osition to compliance with this and with the guidelines of the U.S. Office of Education in many States, especially those in the southern region. The skillful tactics of sonie officials, over the years since the 1954 Court decision to desegregate the public schools~ point up clearly a need for Federal control of administration of funds for these progriuns. Examples of these tactics include the nuishrooniing of pl1\ate schools whose pupils receive grants for tuition from tile States in some cases and the general attitude of many persons that what has been traditionally in education-the dual system-is a "way of life" and each person must be given the freedom of choice about tIle school he will attend. In other words, unless there is I~ederal control of these programs there is. in the largest measure, the possibility that a large segment of our Nation's population-specifically, the Negro-will not be able to share proportionately in these programs which are so necessary to alleviate their present status as disadvantaged citizens. The late Adlai Stevenson summed up the importance of education in this way: The American dream begins in the classroom... The question that looms large today is: How (10 we give all Ameri- cans an opportunity to share in the dream that. begins with education? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. That is a fine statement, Dr. Torrence, and I appreciate your putting in an appearance t.his morning. Our next witness is Mr. J. W. Edgar, commissioner of education, Austin, Tex. It is my understanding that he is not here, but he is represented by Dr. J. Warren Hitt, deputy commissioner. You may proceed, Dr. Hitt. STATEMENT OF J. W. EDGAR, COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION, AUSTIN, TEX., REPRESENTED BY J. WARREN HITT, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION Mr. IIITT. We are sorry that Dr. Edgar was unable to be here. He was previously committed to an educational planning meeting in Denver. I am Warren Hitt, of Austin, Tex., deputy commissioner of educa- tion for Texas, here to discuss titles III and V of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, as these programs operate in Texas. I am including title V, because these two programs as they operate in our State are closely interwoven. In preparing for the implementation of title III, the Texas Educa- tion Agency utilized the resources available to it under title V of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to establish the office of planning to administer the State's responsibility for title III. Approximately one-third of the Texas allocation under title V was devoted to this effort. The office of planning under the direction of the associate commissioner also has the responsibility for coordinating the planning activities of all agency programs related to instruction- academic, vocational, compensatory, special, and adult. PAGENO="0084" 906 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Intra-agencv instructional planning includes coordination of educa- tional research, program evaluation, and communication. Agency staff members in all divisions and departments are assigned to various long- and short-range planning activities under the guid- ance of the office of planning. Aware of the potential too in the projects funded under title III for affecting educational change in rfexas, this planning office assists local schools in planning, developing, operating, and evaluating the projects. Iii keeping with the intent of the title III program, the staff has encouraged schools to take a new look at their educational needs and to develop programs w-liich illustrate innovative ideas. Projects dem- onstrating these programs are helping to create in Texas a.n awareness of successful innovations. In this way, title III may well become the key to educational change. Iii the fall of 196.~, as an initial step in developing a State plan for title III in Texas. a State panel identified the most pressing needs in Texas elementary and secondary education. During the first year of operation of title III in Texas, the State plan adopted by the State board of education served as a guide to local school districts in plan- ning project.s and to the Texas Education Agency in reviewing and recommendmg p'~~ ect s for funding. In December 1~)GG. the State plan was revised in light of changing educational needs and goals. A review of the 10 months of operation of title III, ESEA, in Texas, shows that So projects have been funded to date. Thirteen 1)1~o1ects offer multiservices such as consultations and mobile units, material centers, testing, and enrichment programs. Two planning projects were designed for special groups of children: one for mentally all(l ph~sica11y handicapped children, another for the gifted and talented. Five projects emphasize staff development through such techniques as in service instruction br television, instruction in the use of media, or language development programs for teachers. Thirteen projects are concerned with model subject-matter pro- grams. The other projects provide for such services and activities as a model library-learning center, media centers, educational television services, a neighborhood learning center, and an experimental junior high school. These 50 projects involve an estimated 800 school districts, employ an estimated 450 full-time personnel; and most important. are designed to benefit approximately 1,000,000 of the 2½ million schoolchildren in Texas. Innovative projects. offering new solutions to old educational prob- lems, are being planned. implemented and operated in Texas under title III. As one component of its responsibility for effective utilization of title III. the staff of the Texas Education Agency has made an in- depth study of the concept of regional educational services and the relationship of such services to the title III program in Texas, the State department of education, institutions of higher learning and the. new educational institutions being funded under title IV of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. PAGENO="0085" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 907 On the basis of this study, the agency has identified "providing educational services within a region"-particularly an educational planning capability-as a priority need which should be met through the Texas title III program. A number of other activities have also contributed to recognition of the need for regional educational planning. By September 1967, Texas must. be ready to implement regional media centers which were authorized by the 59th Texas Legislature in 1965. The intent of the media legislation is to provide State money to regional centers to match local expenditures up to $1 per pupil to purchase instructional media such as films, filmstiups, and visuals for use with overhead projectors. Valuable as these aids are in modern teaching, to establish regional media centers outside the context of other regional educational needs would even be to shortchange education in Texas. Therefore, the Texas Education Agency has planned for the imple- mentation of the regional media center in such a way that other needed educational services may eventually be provided. Coordination be- tween State resources for the media center and Federal resources avail- able. under title III would strengthen services available to all schools. In addition, such coordination would provide the machinery-the education service center-for involving all school districts-large and small-in educational planning for the region. To assist. in the development, of this needed regional planning capa- bilit'v and to implement the media legislation, the state l)oard of eclu- cation has adopted policies and designated 20 regions in Texas, each to he served by an education service center. Resources available under title III will make it possible to estab- lish in each center a capable staff to assist in designmg innovational approaches to educational problems. As the centers develop, other educational services which regional schools, large and small, need and want, will become available. And, at ever step of development, evaluation will be a necessary compo- iient of program design. Careful educational planning needs the kind of feedback only evaluation may provide feedback to indicate change of pace and direction, feedback to point out alteration of design and techniques. Regional educational planning pro\~icles an opportunity to tailor education to the unique environment of the region, to the specific needs of the pupils, and to the strengths of the professional educators within the region. This objective is beyond the reach of the majority of Texas school districts functioning alone. But through utilization of resources avail able under State. media legislation and Federal legislation, in- depth educational planning can become a reality in the education service center. Tn reviewIng title ITT project proposals. the Texas Education Agency has made broad use of advisory committees in the State. lYe have worked cooperatively with the TT.S. Office of Education in screen- ing projects to insure~ that. the projects approved for Texas fit. into the overall plan for title ITT in Texas. Activities developed under policies of the State hoard of educatmn have given direction to the title ITT pro~m'am. To ~t the full benefit from these efforts, to insure that the PiII:~~SeS of title ITT are met PAGENO="0086" 90S ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS more fully, title II should, we feel, be funded at the full level author- ized by C~n~ress. We also s~trongly urge that a portion of title III funds-at least 50 percent-l)e sublect to State determination to insure continuity in the development of the program designated and operated by the States. The remaining 50 percent allocated by the U.S. Commissioner of Education would be available to develop the innovative programs needed on a nationwide basis. In these remarks I have pointed out the extent to which title V funds have been utilized in the development of an educational plan- ning capability within the Texas Education Agency. Coupled with the available title III funds, these funds can establish the basis for a strong educational planning program in the State. An additional fact should be noted. The Governor of Texas has established the planning agency council for Texas, with one division of this for coordination of the educational planning efforts of all groups charged with educational planning-the local public schools; the Texas Education Agency the coordinating board, Texas college and university system. It also provides the framework for coordinating the educational activities of other departments of State government such as the de- partment of welfare and the department of health. Based on this approach. and with the results obtained from this type organization and these activities, it is our belief that title V of ESEA should not he amended to establish a separate program for edu- cational planning with separate funding but rather that the funding level of title V as it is now written should be increased to provide the States with the resources needed to carry out a comprehensive pro- gra.rn of educational planning-State. regional, and local. The basis of State educational planning has to be local planning, and the State educational agencies are in the strategic position to assist in local and regional planning. In closing I would like to bring one other item before the committee. Title I of the act is presently extended through fiscal 1968. I believe. In order to work the formulas of this act and to give the State.s their allocations on a timely basis requires from 6 to 8 months on the part of the staff of the U.S. Office to gather the necessary data. Therefore, we strongly urge that you consider extending the Ele- ment.arv and Secondary Education Act, title I, through 1969 during this session of Congress. because if we wait until 196R to make this extension we will be faced in 1969 with a substantial delay that we ex- perienced this year. Thank you very much. Chairman PERKINS. And thank you very much. The next witness is Dr. Richard Miller, director, program on e.du- cational change. University of Kentucky. STATEMENT OF DR. RICHARD MILLER, DIRECTOR, PROGRAM ON EDUCATIONAL CHANGE, UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY Chairman PERKINS. I understand von have made an extensive study of title III. That will be printed as a separate document. I und~r~t~ind tho study ~vas completed about the first of February. PAGENO="0087" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS 909 I understand further you are here today to s~~nimarize this ~tudv, briefly, for us. We shall be delighted to hear you at this tune. Mr. MILLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I might add that it was not only an exhaustive but an exhausting study that we u~idertook for 6 month~. Indeed, it is a privilege to testify an ESEA, title III. before this distinguished committee, and I would like to pay my respects to the fine leadership that. is being given by a fellow Kentuckian. Last May I was aske.d by the USOE to organize and direct a major study of ESEA title III. I accepted this challenge, but was not aware of how difficult and challenging it would be. The study has been completed and within 2 or 3 weeks it should be available through the Goven~ment Printing Office as a committee print of the Senate committee that is the counterpart of yours. The structure of the study is given in some detail in appendix A, but I will outline it here briefly: The independent study has five basic purposes: to analyze and appraise the proposals approved during the first year; to look for "gaps" between where selected areas seem to be going and where the approved projects are pointed; to study overall directions and de- velopments of PACE; to view title III in the broader context of trends in American education; and to study interrelationships of PACE to the various ESEA titles and other programs. Emphasis is placed upon the first three purposes. Twenty special consultants were asked to focus on 17 areas that have been dominant during the first three funding periods. The consultants obtained data. from analysis of proposals in their areas of competence, field visits to PACE sites, two Washington meetings, and other related materials. Several special reports were solicited by the director and these are listed in appendix A. The subsequent sections follow closely what is contained in the. final chapter of the overview section of the title III study. For a sum- mary of the 25 recommendations in the overview volume see ap- pen(lix 3. The future shape of PACE will be determined substantially by what then has happened during the first year. What overall verdict can be given at this time about title III, based upon this study? Considering everything, weaknesses and strengths, blunders, and triumphs, politics and purit.y, title III has thus far achieved out- standing success, probably more so than any other ESEA title. Success is due to its stimulating and fresh nature which catches the imagination and zeal of the most dynamic and creative individuals in the public schools and its appeal directly to public school people provides them with a unique opportunity. In essence PACE is betting on the vitality and vigor of American education at the local level, and the bet is paying off contrary to some predictions that localism in education personifies status quo conser- vat ism. Its success is due in so small measure to the Office of Education title III leadership, that offered by some States, and certainly to leader- ship offered at the project level. PAGENO="0088" 910 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS The optimism of the latter group is indicated by their responses to the question. "Do you believe title ITT is serving as a catalyst for change ?`~ Seventy-six percent answered yes; 2 percent answered no; 9 percent did not express an opinion; and 13 percent were classified as maybe. I mwht add that as of the time consultants traveled around the country and visited some 75 site centers, we discovered a hidden re- source in American education. WTe did not know it was there. This was the~ project directors in the Oeld. There are now roughly 1,500 pro~ect directors, and it grew to 2,000, which is quite a dynamic group of individuals. This was an independent view all of us reached. \Ve have an independent resource here that we ought to use. Arthur Hitchcock has suggested that title ITT might be considered a~ B in an A B C sequence where A is the contemporary educational scene and C is a more innovative and creative educational scene, which hopefully can be realized in a relatively few years. Nolan Estes. Associate F.S. Commissioner for Elementary and Secondary Education, said in mid-lOGO that the hope of title III is still only a (T1eam-a svml)ol of change and not yet a dynamic force. Title. III then should be considered as an intermediate stage-some- thing between the present and the future that can have ripple effects upon e(liicatiofl far he ond its modest size. Some individuals expected more of PACE than it has delivered and this impatience is health so long as it is based upon realistic under- standing of tile ti~i1e element involved in the process of change. Change in attitudes and ways of doing things is a slow process and it is unfair to expect PACE to have instant success in doing what professional educators have not done too well. \Vriting about change in ~ Francis Bacon observed: It is true, that what is settled by custom, though it be not good, at least it is fit. And those things which have long gone together are as it were confederate within themselves: whereas new things piece not so well; but though they help by their utility, yet they trouble by their iiiconformity. Besides they are like strangers, more admired and less favored. The future success of PACE is by no means assured; in fact the honeymoon period i~e1~ouit oner and f he obstacles and problems may become more vexnu~ in the period immediately ahead. A very real problem-one that may afflict all new thrusts-was succintly ex- l)1~5e1l l)V ,Telu1 W. Garduier when lie wrote "Great ventures start with a vis~nuu and end with a pouvel' striuctuire. The age-old oi'ir~uniZati0Pal problem of function and structure --also an age-old problem in au'cluitectural design-will be faced con- tinuoiuslv as tendencies to roufinize the program become more evi- dent. Thie~e pi'essill'es must be resisted by bringing various renewal nieHianisms iflto play. To~rvi'e staff conferen~es is a promising procedure that is being employed: a I9GT hawaiian summer conference of PACE project iliu'e~ors is another: and this study represents still another. Addi- tion;il innovation~ mi~hit include summer appointments of university 1)l'ofe~soi'sas well as public school 1 omiel, and exchange positions where OF title ITT staff nuembers would serve in the field for a short period of time. PAGENO="0089" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDICATION AMENDMENTS 911 Evaluation will continue to be one of the niost diflicult problems for title III as well as for the other ESEA titles. This overview has taken a strong position favoring more and better evaluation but it has also cautioned against looking to evaluation as the mecca that it itself will solve problems. We could become evaluation happy, viewing this diagnostic and remedial tool as the program itself, 0" we could tend to ignore those programs that do not lend themselves to present methods of evalua- tion. Paul Brandwein one of the 20 special consultants, noted that the 3-C's of most large science projects are confusion, comprehension, and clarity-and the confusion stage may last quite awhile. Title III needs to stay as clear as possible of political entanglements and this will not he easy. The future growth of PACE should rest upon what it does to improve the quality of education. Increasing pressures will he applied on OE title III officials to develop priorities that advance this or that. cause many of which have strong l)olitiCal overtones. Some political problems of course, cannot be escaped, and these will need to be confronted, biTt many others can and should be. avoided by keeping the focus on the basic purposes and intentions of PACE. The matter of priorities has been touched upon several times thus far, and it is a. major problem that OE policymakers must wrestle with, within the framework of congressional legislation. For example, have too many arts and humanities projects been approved and too few in ways of achieving organizational flexibility? The overview section has taken this position. Also too few projects creatively and courageously attack urban and metropolitan problems- particularly those relating to racial problems. Any time priorities are attempted, flak can be expected. Those groups recommended for deceleration have been given unfair treat- ment and those recommended for acceleration have, received due con- sideration. OE officials may minimize criticism if criteria are de- veloped for determining priorities and if these are determined in connection and in cooperation with its National Advisory Board. The project directors themselves have some views on future develop- ments of PACE, as given in their responses to this question: What idea and suggestions would you offer for future developments of title The need for more money and for greater dissemination are future needs ment1oned most often by project directors, with const.ruction funds and consultant help following. Taken together, more funding in general-and for construction in particular-account for over 16 percent of the responses. Creative use of PACE project directors as consultants and advisors can be a strong plus to American education. This reservoir of talent needs to be applied toward othe.r types of projects and programs. In the next few years several thousand educators will have had PACE experience. More thought needs to be given to how this resource might best serve education. Based upon carefully conducted interviews with I .G34 parents. the Gallup study concluded that. educators have not appreciated the extent PAGENO="0090" 912 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS to which the public is ready to accept change. It could well be that the public~ in response to education, is as far ahead of educators as it is ahead of its legislative leaders in the field of government. All PACE projects are required to list community participation in their proposal, so recommendation No. XXV should be redundant. But that. is not the case. The fact that community involvement is required during formative stages of project development has meant that the more fundamental community involvement in education over a period of time and use of title III as a symbol of broader change needed on the local scene has not come about as yet. Representative Charles G-oodell has stated: Unless we see an educational ferment at the local level . . . all the Federal efforts will be for naught. And in his 1967 state of the Union address, President Lyndon B. Johnson spoke about relationships in these terms: Federal energy is essential. But it is not enough. Only a total working partnership among federal, state and local governments can succeed. The test of that partnership will be the concern of each public organization, each private institution and each responsible citizen. Those are some of the points. In conclusion, I might mention that title III is really an institution of great expectations, based upon what has already been accomplished. Its ability to do good for the future of education is limited only by the vision, courage, and persist- ence of those in policymaking roles, such as yourselves. Local schools are ready to go further and faster, and whether they (10 so will depend upon congressional supports anti upon OES leader- ship. I emphasize the point. All systems are go at the local level. They are ready to go. How fast von go is really, in a sense, up to you. Thank you very much. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Bra dernas. Mr. BIiADEMAS. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. Thanks very much to all of the people who have testified. I have several questions. Let me begin, Dr. Miller, by asking you a couple of questions. I have in my hand the document to which you have been referring, ~Catalyst for Change." I raise an issue which has been discussed on title III programs by a number of our colleagues. That is the issue of whether or not the State departments of education should, in addition to the present statutory requirement to engage in review anti recommendations of title III projects. have a mandatory statutory veto power over local school district applications under title III. I notice on page A-150 of this document, in which von discuss the issue of Federal versus State department of education control, you note: Prophets of doom ~vho predicted dire coilseoiuences would flow from what they alie~ed \vould ic the Cominissioliers control of local school systems revealed their fuiidaniental iiiisunclerstaiidin~ of patterns of power in public education. Their forebodings have not been realized at all based upon the findings of this study. Then on ~age A-l.~6 you say. speaking of the position of a State Title III coordinator: PAGENO="0091" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 913 This position generally should be filled by someone from outside the state department, and he should personify the PACE spirit of innovativeiiess and creativity. This qualification is conspicuously absent among many state Title 111 coordinators who are more interested in staff and line relationships within the department than in a dynamic thrust for their Title III program. Then you note that some headway has been made among State de- partments of education aiid that, to quote you, "The overall quality of State department. effort on PACE has definitely improved." The following conclusion of your report is, I fear, quite revealing in describing the attitude of so many of the. State departments of educa- tion toward their role of leaclership in respect of Title III programs: The fact that there are oniy ten full-time Title III coordinators indicates that a su~stai~tial number of the states have not taken Title III seriously enough to assign full-time status to the position. I lio~e you see now why I am not persuaded by the arguments of those. who want to give to the States mandatory veto powe1~ over the Title III applications of local school districts, as distinguished from the present power of the States to review and make re.cominendat ions with respect to Title III applications from local school districts. I would ask you to comment on this issue in the light of your survey. Mr. MILLER. I am happy to comment. I wonder if I might take just a second for background information. Would this be permissible, Mr. Chairman? In o:~der to set this in perspective, let me outline just a second the State department situation as I see it.. The State departments in American education have increased tremendously in power in the last 5 years, I would say, and I think this is generally considered to be a very good thing. We have some people who have mixed feelings, but basically this is a plus.. Many of us who worked a.s consultants to State departments certainly have worked to this end. However, the St ate departments have a variety of roles as the States vary a great. deal. On the other hand, the basic roles of most State departments are regulatory, are supervisory, are doing the types of things that need to be done in order to get minimum foundations, in effect, or to get financing. These are vitally important. There are very few States that are really taking a. lead in innovation. I am not saying that. because their Mr. Hitt is here, but I have had the privilege of visiting his State. I know of Roger Barton's work. Certainly, you can name Texas, California, and New York. I have named New York and California in my book as States which have really taken real leadership roles in terms of the innovative aspects. We are. talking, however, about 50 States and talking about tremen- dous diversity within the country as a whole. Therefore, any discus- sion of title III, I think, needs to be framed in this general back- ground of the importance of State departments, of their very pressing day-to-day, week-to-week, and year-to-year jobs which are there and which will be there regardless of the Federal Govermuent. Having said that, we did look very closely at the State. departments. We visited a total of 16. I visited 12 myself. Generally speaking, we found very few States tooled up for title III. As a matter of fact, you ~an say t.he same about title I. PAGENO="0092" 914 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS We did a survey of all the States to find out just how many States really had full-time title III coordinators. As of October 1966 we found eight. Since then there was one that we found, making it nine, and prol)ablv one more. So we have 10 out. of 50 that have full-time State coordinators. In terms of really neriously considering title III, we suggest an average State should have at least two full-time co- ordinators, and adequate secretarial help. In the document there is a position taken in terms of one of the major recommendations, I would like to read it because it does weigh very directly on the point. It is toward the area of strengthening department-State department roles in the area of title III. It reads as follows: Stale departments of education should receive a four percent allocation of the overall Title III appropriations, for, one, development, stimulation and dissemina- tion. and two, administration for administration of the Title. In other words, it is recommended here that 4 percent be allocated to help take care of the real problems some states have had. There is the following recommendation, how-ever, which takes quite a definite position in terms of the authority, recommendations ~22. It states: Responsibility for direction and administration of Title III should remain in the OE. I might add also then in reference to that point one of the ~) Con- sultants was Norm Curlin who is director of the Center for Innovation in New York State. Norm Curlin did quite an exhaustive study of title III and basically in his reports he substantiates this basic position of keeping title III in the OE as administrator, but also closer Federal- State relationships which we concur in fully. I am sorry to take so long, but this is a complicated issue. I will stop there. Mr. BRADEM~S. At the local level, the act requires that in the plan- ning and operation of title III programs there must be participation of representatives of the cultural and educational resources of the area to be served. Mr. Hit.t., do you now-, in terms of whatever coordinating ef- fort.s you exercise at the state level in respect of title III projects, provide for the participation of persons outside the State department of public education? Chairman PERIcINs. Does the gentleman ask unanimous consent to proceed? Mr. Blt&DE~rAs. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Is there objection? There being none, you may proceed. Mr. BRADEMAS. Is my question clear'? Mr. Hvrr. I~t me make one point, clear. When we suggest that possibly 50 percent of these funds should be under State. determination, we do not intend in any way to imply that we haven't had very good working relationships with the U.S. Office. In fact. I spent yesterday with Mr. Barton, who is our associate corn- missioner for planning. with representatives of the U.S. Office of Edu- cation staff going thi'ough all of the projects w-hich have been funded PAGENO="0093" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTCATION AMENDMENTS 915 up to this time, and all of the piojects that were recommended for funding in the Januar review period. We caine out of the clay's work of looking at the entire title III program in Texas in very close agreement. Mr. BRADEMAS. My question was not clear. I wasn't concerned about the relationship in this question with the Office of Education, but I was concerned about whether or not if the States play an im- portant role in title III work, do you in the State of Texas, in your State education department, work with people outside the State de- partment. of education? That is to say, the universities and other educational resources? Mr. HIT'r. Practically every project that has been funded in Texas does have associated with the project a university, and in some in- stances the city symphony orchestra. Mr. BRADEMAS. No. My question is not clear yet. The point is at the local level the law presently requires that when a local school district puts together a title III application, that it not be engaged solely in a dialog with itself, but that the local public school othcials talk to other educational and cultural people in the area, of all kinds. My question is, Do you, in undertaking your planning and coordina- tion work in respect to title III programs at the State level, do you in your office talk to people outside your own department ? Mr. HITT. ~1es. Mr. BRADEMAS. That is all I am asking. Mr. HITT. Yes. We have always. In our regular operations, not even considering title III, as a pattern of operation, we always have constantly used advisory groups drawn from the schools and from I lie lay public, and from other organizations and institutions. Mr. Bw~DE3IAS. You do this in title 111 as well? Mr. T-IITT. Yes. It occurs at the local and State level, both. Mr. BRADrM~~s. I have just one other question and then I will yield back, Mr. Chairman. I notice, Mr. Hitt, you have about 16 Teacher Corps programs in your State involving, at least the last time I looked at them, about four institutions of higher learning. Can you give us any general comment on the problems you may have had or how it is going? Mr. HITT. I am not in a position to make much comment on the Teacher Corps because this program has a relationship directly from the TT.S. Office of Education and the institutions involved. The State department of education has not been involved in it. I would say that the proposed amendments to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act that do put some approval responsibility in the State is very important if this program is to succeed. Mr. BRADEMAS. I)o you support that amendment ? Mr. HITT. I would. Mr. BRADEMAS. I yield back, Mr. Chairman. rF11~k you. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Erlenborn. Mr. ERLENRORN. I pass, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Pmuixs. Mrs. Green. i\hs. GIIEI:x. I would like to reserve my time. PAGENO="0094" 916 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Scherle. Mr. SCHERLE. Mr. Chairman, I would like to reserve my time for later. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Deflenback. Mr. DELLENBACK. May I ask you a question about. one of the statis- tics you cited, Mr. Miller? You indicated, as I read you, that some 10 States are at present tooled up for title III. Did you mean that to be 10 out of 50 or 10 out of the. 16 which you indicated your group had covered when you said you covered 12 personally? Mr. MILLER. I meant. 10 out of the 50. Also, when you break that down further, the statistic even becomes more significant. I broke it down by dates. Then, also, if you are not a full-time title III coordinate, what allo- cation of your time do you give to title III activities? Of that, nine give oniy 10 percent of the time to title III; three give 70 percent; three give 60 percent: and 50 percent of the time is given by eight. So, we also broke down for those who gave part time what estimate of time they give, also what job did you come from to your present job. So, we have a breakdown on what they came from into the title 111 job. Mr. DELLENBACK. Let me be sure I understand. I didnt total in my mind those statistics that you just stated. How many States are not. fully geared up for operation under title III or at least partially geared up? Mr. MiLLER. If you take the assumption that every State with a title III program should have at least one full-time State coordinator, and I would think that is a reasonable assumption, in terms of having visited some of the smaller as well as the larger States, t.hen only 10 States as of within a month have full-time title III coordinates, nine or 10. There is one in there I can't really classify. It is nine or 10. If you take the other 41 or 40, then I have asked what pe.rcent of your time do you give to title III, and I also have have that breakdown, which I will not go into now. Mr. DELLENBACK. Then out of those 40, how many are doing nothing whatsoever with title III? Can you give me an answer on that? How many of them are doing something but have less than one full-time person? Mr. MILI.~ER. On the percent of the total time given to title III, the lowest we have is 5 percent of the time. There are 40 part-time title III coordinators. One is giving 5 percent or less. Nine are giving 10 percent or less, and one is giving 20 percent.. I could go on. Mr. DELLENBACK. So, about 10 of them are giving substantially no time, 10 percent or less? Mr. MILLER. That. is a good generalization; yes. Mr. DELLENBACK. So, 20 percent on one end have a full-time person, and 20 percent on the other end are doing practically nothing, and the intermediate 60 percent are doing something between 10 and 100 per- cent? Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir: that would follow very closely what. we found in t.he study. Mr. DELLENBACK. Can you say anything, in pursuance of Mr. ilitt's suggestion :li)otTt .~ pe1~e11t of the funds being made available PAGENO="0095" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDtCATION AMENDMENTS 917 to the State departments in those States which are truly doing a good job, the State with your 20-percent statistic? How can we best take advantage under this program of the State departments which are tooled up to do an effective job without ignoring the fact that evident- ly a number of them are doing almost nothing? Mr. MILLER. That is a very difficult one. I t.hink we are talking about individual situations here, in terms of an average class, and yet m terms of States we treat them all alike. This, I contend, is unfair. On the other hand, if you gave the same ruling to all the States in this respect., I would say it. would be unfair to the States that are not tooled up and some States that are not basically interested in innovation and creativity. There are some States, and we have to be honest about this, which I think is an important aspect. Half of the States still have appointed State superintendents and half have elected State superintendents. I think the point is, as I mentioned in the volume, we may well ex- periment, trying two or three States, trying to turn title III funds over to them. I think it would be a fair position. That would be for a. couple of years. Test it and do an experiment to see if it works. You can start with New York and California. I think as you look at title III these are States that are tooled up. Texas, I would say, would be very close in this lead. They have taken it seriously. They have gotten the professors involved, the local school people involved, people from the arts involved. So, we are talking about that type of State and we are talking about other States, also, which have done almost nothing. If you take the money and go right into title I type of projects, that would be the best way to kill title III in those States. It is a tough problem be- cause you have these two aspects of it, as I see it. Mr. DELLENBACK. To assist me, I perhaps ought to ask you this pri- vately rather than publicly, but since we are having a dialog in public here, I will ask it this way: Do you have any comment on Oregon and what it has or hasn't done well? WTas that one of your 16 States? Mr. MILLER. I kiiow Oregon and the superintendent of education there. I have worked very closely with the superintendent in Port- land. He is a personal friend of mine. I think Oregon would be cer- tainly very high on this list.. I haven't done the ranking, and I would be foolish t.o try it. I will give you some of the good State.s but I will not ment.ion some of the others. Mr. DELLENBACK. Under this same general coverage, may I bring, you, Dr. Torrence, into this subject.? I was concerned by what I read in your testimony, to the effect that unless we keep the Federal Government deeply involved in this you are afraid tha.t the job will not be done in the State or States with which yo.u are most familiar. Would you generalize and go beyond your own particular State in this? Would you be talking about more than Alabama.? Are you talking about. all of the South? Can you give us any additional comments o.n this? Mr. TORRENCE. Yes, sir. I would certainly think it wou'd go be- yond Alabama and would cover most of the South. PAGENO="0096" 915 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDtCATION AMENDMENTS Mi. I)1:LLrxI~xcTc Iou feel it imperative, theil, that the Federal Government continue in these areas to deal directly with t.he local districts rather than leaning very heavily on the State departments? Mr. rfoRRFx(~E. I think that there is room for cooperation between the Federal and the State. but the direction should be in OE at the Federal level. Mr. IDELLENIIACIi. Do you have ally suggestions you can make to us relative to what further than is already being done under title V could be done to beef up the State departments? Part of the basic question which faces us at the Federal level, and particularly those of us who come from States which, by and large, are doing a good job on a State level and on a local district level in education, is how to reach a common denominator that. extends across 50 States which are diverse. Some of us are deel)ly concerned that our State departments ought to be given a great deal of responsibility, and that we would rather have our State departments deeply involved than we would have the Federal Government deeply involved. We are met with tile answer that you can't do this in States A, B, and C because their State depart- ments just wouldn't do the job and, therefore, we must go to the low- est ~omm~n denominator on the Federal level that we don't feel necessarily benefits education in our particular States as best it could be benefited. Texas may be one of these States and Oregon may be one of tile States maybe New York and maybe certain other States. Do you have anything in this area that you can say to us. How can we handle both of these problems at the same time? Dr. Miller has made one suggestion. Perhaps you can pick out two, three or four States and give them control. But this is very difficult to do. Mr. TORRENCE. It is a very difficult problem, sir. I don't know beyond what Dr. Miller has said, really, at this pomt, what ought to be done or what might be tested or tried. Mr. DELLEYBACK. May I ask one additional question, Mr. Chair- man, if I may? Let me be pointed. Would you feel that education in Alabama would suffer if we were to go to a situation which placed increased responsibility effectively on the State's department at tile expense of tile Federal Government dealing directly with local school districts? Mr. TORRENCE. I think that it would suffer and that there would be tremendous inequities in those who do profit from the programs. Mr. DELLENBACK. At least in this one State, the State department would not. measure up to what it ought to be doing? Mr. TORRENCE. Not in my judgment. Mr. DELLENBACK. Would you expand this over any neighboring States to Alabama? Mr. TORRENCE. Yes; this would hold true in most of the neighbor- ing States, I think. Mr. DELLENBACK. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Esch. Mr. EscIl. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. PAGENO="0097" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 919 I have one or two questions to (lireCt to Mr. Miller, if I might. Xou suggest. I think, that we are in the X-B---C complex, which is a nice. categorization of predicament. I woul~l like to question you in terms of the availability of competent sta if to continue the transition from A B to (. Von piedict or suggest a huge increase in ternis of the iiioiiev ;iuthiorized iiiider tills progiani within the, next 4 years. What about availability of individuals, professionals, and the num- ber of people competent to carry on in the field? Would you see a Problem here? Mr. MILLER. Sir, the point you raise is the 1)oint that the project (lirectors are most concerned about. If von ask the project directors to answer that are your three most difficult problems, the first is peo- l)]e, the. people problem. It. is a. very simple answer. It comes through loud and clear. The percentage is a dominaiit one. Not only that, but. the people problem in terms of the regional labs, in terms of R. & D. developments, too. That is the one prol)leln. Mr. Escii. In effect, there is competition within the programs, them- selves, now for qualified people; is that right ? Mr. MILLER. Yes, and I would also suggest that the profession has not yet realized the reservoir of talents in the title III directors. Iii another year they will be siphoned off. When you take schoolchildren, give them quite different experiences, take the restive, the ambitious, the slightly abrasive, the type of young- ster who often will go outside the profession because it is not exciting enouphi or challenging enough, this is a person that, geneiallv speak- ing, we found to be filling the title III jobs. This is the type of person who will be siphoned off into other types of operations, I am afraid. Mr. ESCH. l)octor, would you want to make some suggestion as to the solution to this problem? Do you see what directidn we might take professionally or nationally? Mr. MILLER. I think there is the aspect of several possible alterna- tives. One is to look upon their uses in other types of Federal pro- grams at the local level. In other words, if they only have three years, maybe this is all you can expect. Also, there maybe an interchange of project directors. Another suggestion we have had is that the Teacher Corps l)e brought in to help the problem. In other words, there is a real rela- ionsiiip for the. Teacher Corps bringing people from other countries. Why not bring 1,000 educators from other countries into the projects? There are a lot of ways you can look at the problem, in addition to utilizing the personnel you have already gained at the local level. I can go on, but those are some suggestions. Mr. ESCH. Let's turn, if we might, to another point. ~oii quoted Mr. Gardner on his idea that great ventures start with a vision an(l end with a power structure. You seem to be concerned with the relationship between the power structure that will be developed eventually within this Elementary and Secondary School Act, and its relationship to creativity. I think these are the two areas. ~1ou are siurgestmg. I assume, that. we don't. have a. great deal of creativity prior to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act 7i-4~2----G7--pt. 2-7 PAGENO="0098" 920 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS within the preseiit structure ? The premise. is based on the fact that prior to this time we didn't have as much creativity as we need? Mr. MILLER. Is this in American education as a whole? Mr. ESCH. Yes. Mr. MILLER. Definitely I would state we have not been known for creativity in American education. Mr. ESCH. The second premise is based on the point that we will be in a short time a "routinized," situation in regard to the Elementary and Seeondary School Act and will be in a. similar problem in the near future. Mr. MILLER. As a former political scientist, I am concerned about structure and function, as I think many educators are today. I think the problem is how can you maintain flexibility and yet make the rules increasingly sophisticated? For example, the new guidelines in title III include the bit about evaluation. Well, we think there should be something on evaluation. But you keep adding this and things and things that are important, to be sure, but this in a sense is sort of an approaching torrent which inundates a local school administrator. He has an increasing flood of paper he has to work with. I am very sympathetic to his point of view. So, the problem is, how can you keep the fluids in terms of require- ments and yet keep it regularized enough so that it can be systemized? When you are dealing with 1,000 proposals, you have to have a real svsteni. It. is a real problem. I think, myself, the total OE staff mem- bers of title 111-I have been privileged to work almost as a staff member, with nothing being withheld from me-I think they are doing a good 101) with the problem. I think we need to be aware of the problem. I would say intensively aware of it in another 3 or 4 months, looking at it in terms of the next year's program. There may be ways we can innovate here. Maybe we don't need all the information we are getting. You see, it is interesting. The OE staff feels they need statistics to verify its program. I am not sure it needs all these statistics and they are not sure, either, but they have to include everything, including the kitchen sink, to make sure they have touched all bases, in case Congress or some other person wants the fact and figures. It is a dilemma they are caught in. I am also sympathetic to the local level where they have to react to these things. You probably have reaction at the State level, too, I suppose. Mr. Hi'rr. I sure do. Mr. Esdil. This brings out the relationship that exists with regard to the Federal program, and the need for us to maintain a simple and direct relationship between the State and the Federal programs as much as possible. Mr. MILLER. Very much so. Mr. Escu. The other factor is that it does suggest that. to the degree to which the Elementary and Secondary Education Act was, in e~'ect., a. stimulus to education in the United States, and that perhaps that is its malor contributing factor. Mr. MILLER. I think this is where it seems to be on title III. PAGENO="0099" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS 921 I have looked at title IV intensively in terms of the regional labs, and also a little on I. I would say particularly in III it is this way. In I, I think it is much more massive, much more difficult. The lab is another story. This is where I see it. It may be serving as a groimd- work from which you have a takeoff, maybe in another year or two. Where I look at it, I may not be correct. It is very hard to get a handle on this. Mr. Escii. Dr. Torrence~ I think you suggest that we do need con- tinuing Federal control within certain States in order to maintain and develop those children which may not otherwise have the benefits of a proper education. Would you go so far as to suggest that we need a Federal system of education on a broad base to accomplish this purpose? Mr. TORRENCE. No; I wouldn't go that far. Mr. ESCH. You think that there are advantages to a State-based system? Mr. TORRENCE. Yes, sir; definitely. Mr. Escir. I would still like to hear you address yourself sometime today as to how we might break through utilizing statewide systems in certain areas, utilizing them fully, to make sure that the impoverished children are taken care of. What you are saying is that we really need statewide systems but we are willing to bypass statewide systems for certain groups? Mr. TORRENCE. For certain programs, certain kinds of activities, not only because of the racial problem, but I expect that in areas other than the south for a program of this kind if directed fully by the State, certain areas of the State perhaps would not benefit as well as other areas that have certain kinds of influences with the State de- partments. I am particularly concerned about rural areas. Mr. ESCH. The power structure within the State is such that more attention is given to some areas rather than others? Mr. TORRENCE. That is true. Mr. ESCH. I think all of us are concerned with this, that is: the re- lationship of maintaining a well-structured program and vet meeting the needs of a given area. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Mrs. Green. Mrs. GREEN. Mr. Hitt. I notice that you did not approve of the amendment which would set up another program for educational planning, but it was your hope that the State departments of educa- tion would do this, if I understand your statement. Mr. Hrr'r. It wasn't my intent to leave the implication that I was taking the position that the State department of education was the only one that could do it. I was trying to make this position, that~ there is existing authority in the present title V act to carry out edu- cational planning in a State. I illustrated that in our State the Governor has established a plan- ning council involving all of the departments that are invo'ved in edu- cational planning. So we do achieve coordination. I am not concerned about the fact that the Governor has to approve an application, because in our State I feel sure it would he assigned to the Texas Education Agency for the elementarv-secoiuhiry educa- PAGENO="0100" 922 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTATION AMENDMENTS tion planning and to the higher education board for the higher phase of it. Mrs. GREEN. Do you have a copy of the bill? Mr. lTirr. Yes. MIS. (im*:rx. ()n page ~ht) there is the. provision that sets aside S15 1111111011. and authorizes the Comiiiissioiier to make grants to public 01. J)rivate i~oiiproht agencies. institutions or organizations or to make colit lacts wit ii 1)ublic or p11~~te agencies, institutions, or organizations for special projects related to the purposes of this part to be conducted on au interstate, regional, or uletrol)OlitalI basis. ~1iat is your rea(tioli to the Commissioner being given the authority to (`nultract for conipreliensive plannnig with the private agencies? Mr. Ilirr. 1 see no objection to this. Mi's. (~i~i:rx. I )oes it do anything to the State departments of education Mr. I-iirr. I donUt think so. There is no reason why some of this planning (alit he going forward through other devices and other iiistitutjons at the same time it is going through the State department. But 1 am a firm believer that if we are going to move the title III program. if we are going to move 1)UbhlC education in general, there must he a~ heavy involvement of the State department of education. The 1.~. ()ffice cannot move directly from Washington into the school districts without involving the State department of education and clomg an effective job. This is the position I take. It is a part- neiship operation. I siiv. involving the Office of Education and the State department of education, and the local organization. Mrs. (hii:rx. Let me turn to something else, if T may. Luder the provisions for the handicapped children, again this bill WI (old in ye the ( `oniuIlissiolier of Education the authority to make gi~iu1t5 to noiipioht ~igen~'ies. and also to enter into contracts with p~- vii te pu )!i~ making orgauiizatioiis and agencies for research or demon- stI~Itioli ~ l)o von think that this is a good trend in terms of sound educational plauillimlir Mr. TTITT. I cafl r~nlv react to this from how I think it should operate in 0111' State of Texas. I thiiiik that as we establish in Texas these ~O regional service centeW which will have as their core educational planning, and each governed b a lay hoard-we will have a pi'ofessiomial educator as the director, who will serve on the Texas Commission of Education Planning Council-this is the way we can get an unidentified plan- ning job done. If we plan without. this planning, leading directly to implernerita- I oil of- a soimd program oF education, then we have wasted our time planning. It becomes an academic vacuum, so to speak. ~o. I think it has to be built into the framework with safeguards so fli~tt vou do get innovative practice and bring it to bear on the prob- lewis of educat~on. When von ask a question about how this language would work, it would depend on how the U.S. Commissioner would administer this language. Mrs. GREEN. The point I am trying to get your views on is: that in three places in this bill, funds could be used by the Commissioner t.o PAGENO="0101" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS ¶)23 make grants to 011 icr e(llicaI ioi~ai agencies or enter into ontra ~ts with pubiC 01 private agemies, orlranizal ions, or inst ito! ions. Is it a uood trend to say to the (~oinni is~ziolier of Itdiications office. that in the e( Iucat ion of the land ica pped. ill vocat ioiial eduatioII. and if we do it then in other areas, too, von can bypass tile State (iepartnient of edit- Clitioli. VOll caii bypass tile city suh)eIiiiteii(lent of schools, and von call eiiter lilt)) a (ont1a(t~ with a private ~i~'eiicv to car~v out tlie~e silille P1ogi111°5 At the same time I would point out, and I would like Mr. Miller's reactioii to this because I think I came in at the point lie was suggest- in~ that 4 percent be given for adniinist r~itive costs, The trend, as I see it. and I don t ha \~e It coiiiplete report Oil this. is that I'] ien we enter ilit)) (`oiltracts wjt]i 1)11 vate~ agencies ~ve do it 011 Ii iost-pl iis-a-t~xeoi-fee basis. We are doing this iii Job Corps: we a ic doin~ it iii ie~ea rcli. We pay the piiv:ite piohtniaking institution, \vhlethler ii he Phi ilco, Packa rd-Bell, or aiiv other one, we pay all ot their costs, and i lien a Hxed fee whiioi~ m~iv amountS to or S 1)elcel)t. We apparently are not willing to give the state departments ut cdii- cation 1 1)et(ent br the adiniiìistrative costs. What is the direction in which we are headed if we contInue I his? Is this good? Mr. I-Err. Mrs. Green, I believe that the F.S. Commissioner should have some resources with which independent research and surveys and planning can be pursued. But I think it is a matter of degree. I think the mainstern for educational planning must involve the States; at the same time, we should have, some capability for the F.S. Corn- missioner to pursue a line of inqUiry. So, I would say it is a matter of degree. Mrs. (iiiEEx. Would you put any percentage on it Mr. Hirr. No: I don't believe I would be in a position to put a per- centage on it. But if it goes into States iii pi'actically every in- stance when we are administering programs of this kind in our State we do involve private institutions and we (To make contacts to carry out some of these efforts. Mm's. Gm~EN. With the pi'of'itniaking institutions? Mr. Hirr. Yes. ~\[rs. GREEN. Wrhat kinds of financial arrangements do you make? Mr. Hirr. WTe are preparing to enter into a contract now with a national accounting firm to assist m tile design of a statewide data sys- tem, the application of computers to public school operat ion. trying to develop a statewide system so there will be compatibility throughout tile State. This contract will be made with an accounting firm under the same rules that any private business woul(l make this contract. It will be strictly on their standard fee with a not-to-exceed figure in the face of the contract. There will be no cost-plus to it. It would be just like any other private busmess would enter into such contract. Mrs. GREEN. Mr. Miller. would you comment Mr. MILLER. I certainly fully concur with what Commi~siomter Ijitt. has said. I mi ~ht add hat the pm'oi ilem. T tli ink. l'cndca liv is. TIOiV can you get I lie 101) (lone best ? That is really the first qiucstion. We have a job to he done. You ask how can you get the job done Pet. Tt m~iv 1)0 i lnit ~:ciu can ~:ef resources from with in ii Sr e. It PAGENO="0102" 924 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS may be that you are dealing with a regional problem, such as the si ucly that I was conducting on title III, which is really a national problem. That is, in that respect. Therefore, this wouldn't be of equal concern to all the States. I would say that is the real question, on the resources. When you come up to resources in education, we are pretty feeble in terms of providing the types of assistances that are needed for cer- tain types of studies. For example, I know the situation in Vermont where Commissioner Gibony wanted this, so he looked for educational help and he went to ADL, Arthur Little, as California did. They didnt do it by just turning to ADL, but they did it on the basis of look- ing around for resources to do the job. It is partly a weakness that we have in education. We have not developed this. We are developing by leaps and bounds but we are still behind. It doesn't really concern me much as long as it is taken on the basis of who can do the job that needs to be done. Incidentally, on the planning. I think the Commissioner does need funds to do planning and to do research. This has been a real problem in terms of title I, for example, and title III. There are many other types of research that need 10 be clone on title III. The one that we did really just scratched the surface. Yet there are flow funds ava jiable. Foi' this type of research, whether done by a university or an in- dustrial firm, in my opinion is not the real point. The real point is who can best do the job that needs to be clone. This is my view on it. Mrs. GREEN. Did I understand you to say that staffing was the No. I problem. as you see it Mr. MILLER. It is the No. 1 problem in terms of the 7~3 project directors who i'espondecl to an anonymous questionnaire on their total operation. I asked them to list the three most difficult problems they faced in title III. No. 1 was personnel. by all means. Mis. GREEN. 1)o you think that that can be said of all educational pio~ianis and problems that we have today. getting adequate staff? Mr. MILLER. I am afraid so. It is just all across, in research de- velopments. educational technology. Mi's. GREEN. Then may I go back to the trend of entering into con- tracts with private agencies on a. cost-pius-a-hxed-tee basis. Such groups are not limited by the voters in a district, in tax levies or bond issues. The 1)rohtnlaking institution can pity any salai'y necessar to do the job and make a. profit. on what they do. It seems reasonal)le to assume that. they would siphon off people ill the pul)lic ~chool systems or in univem'sities because the can offer a much higher salary. I am not arguing about what the salary should be. I think all salar- ies should be higher than what we are paying in education. But,. I am wondering what we are doing to tile total educational program if we do this. I can cite R. & D. labs as one. Here we have in every State hut California. I believe, the R. & P. lab and it is not suhieCt to any tax limits of a state. It is not subject to any vote or any apin'oval lw the state le~islatui'e. or the approval of Congress or anybody else. It i~ a. law unto itself. coml)letely autonomous. They offer in every area that I know of higher salaries than State superintendents receive, higher salaries than the Commissioner of PAGENO="0103" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 925 Education, higher salaries than could be attained in almost any educa- tional program within the State. I am not directing your attention to what the salaries should or should not be, but what does it do to the total educational program and structure? Mr. MILLER. Mrs. Green, you have touched on several difficult prob- lems, and if I have missed your question, would you bring me back to it? First, the regional lab is a difficult problem, in my opinion. The regional labs set up high salaries to attract the very best people. but the fact is the jobs they have had to offer have not been exciting enough or challenging enough to attract the best people. In other words, it has been my experience, studying the personnel of the labs, and you have, of course, made a very extensive study of this also, is that the. salaries have been the major attraction and not the job, whereas we really intended it to be the other way. They intended to give the man enough salary to get the I)eOPle they wanted. I am not so much concerned about the regional lab siphoning off from the university, because there are lots of benefits and a lot of commitments you can get. from being with children, from teaching and doing research that the labs do not offer. Mrs. GREEN. Could I interrupt there for just a moment? The State department of education in each State should offer a salary to attract the best possible individual that. they coul(l get for the State superintendent's job. Isii't this equally as important as to set up a regional educational lab that is entirely indepeiideiit and autonomous, and sa.y "You caii offer as high a salary as you want to" Mr. MILLER. I would say that every State superintendent, in the country should receive at least the equivalent as the best paid college president in the State. That is just an opener, a flat statement. I think it is a very important and a very key job. The salaries are nothing short of disgraceful in some States. This is a fact and it certainly has been said by many people. I think it needs to be restated. Having said that, I don't think it is totally a salary job. though. ill terms of the State department's role. Some people simply are not attracted, regardless of the salary, to the types of work that would be involved in the State departments as they now exist. This is not saying it is bad. It is simply saying that different types of people like different types of work. I think this is a healthy situation. So, salary would help immeasurably, but. I don't think it could be equated synonymously with quality, as sueh. It would help a lot. This is how I see it. Mrs. GREEN. Didn't you in your statement. say in many of the States we don't have the leadership we should have? Mr. MILLER. Yes in the area of innovation and in the area of crea- tivity. In other areas, in terms of certification, supervision, other types of leadership, I would have to consider each type of leadership. To me, leadership is a many splendored thing, and you have to almost take it by overall leadership. PAGENO="0104" 926 ELEMENTADY AND SECONDARY EDtCATIOX AMENDMENTS Mrs. Gurrx. }Tow would we attract the leadership in tue State if we set up other a~encies within the states with higher salaries and more attractive working conditions? Mr. MTLLEn. I concur, an(l I think, as I mentioned earler it is dis- ~iaeeful, the salaries we do have. Also, there is the fact that half of the states have elected State snl)erintefldleflts. This makes the job ver poi it lea I. as many of von know. This is a real PI~0lJIem. Mr~. (Tarry. Ilien your position i~ still the same, that one, we are ;ustihed. as a. }ederal Government. setting up and giving funds to l)!iv~~te iitstitutioas and organizations and two, it (loesnt have any etleet 011 the leadership or the staffing of 1 lie traditional educational ~I((lTpS 1\ir. MILLrrt. I would ~av if it happened often enouh, it would be one thin~i. I clout think it happens too often, to begin with. Secondly. I look at the first criterion of how can you best. do the job. Jf you can get resources in education to do it, fine; I would say do this. hut if von (.`anllot ~et iesources. then (lout do a poorer 101) than can be clone bY ~rettbig outside resources. That, to me, is the criterion. \Ve don't have resources in some States to (10 these tYpes of surveys and studies. 511(1 then I would say to go and get tile people who can (10 the 1oh. Mrs. GrEEN I Presiding). Mr. Quie, the gentleman from Minnesota. Mr. Qviv. Mr. Miller, von said something in answer to Mr. Dellen- I)ack. as I ufl(lerst oocl it, that unless there were Federal direction to title III. as we have now, that title III projects would just go on the same as title I projects do now. T)o I understand you correctly? ~\ir. MILLEit. I said in some States. Mr. Qiiv. It is ii understanding that quite a large numl)er of title III projects are really that type of a project anyway, rather than what we had envisioned, such as experimental centers or model school sys- tems. What some schools are doing are just demonstrations. Isn't it true that a large number of them that are funded are of this nature Mi'. M1~L1~. If you have a chance to read the volurne~, you will see that. we are quite. critical. Mi'. Qnir. Yes, but it is a little thick to read right. now. Mr. MTrr;En. I know. And you have my sympathy. We are quite critical of what we found in the reports. As a matter of fact. I would say we took our job to find what. was wrong with title lIT. \Ve found man v things wrong with it. But, when von take the total package. looking at it, we think it comes oft very well. I dont think there is contradiction there. Getting specifically to your point, it is pretty hard to expect people to think creatively. I think peo1~le. basically go into three different ca~ egoiies. They go into either people-people. things-peophe~ or ideas- eopie. There are some. All-American triple threats, but most. people will fall into three ~eneral categories, in my opinion. Tl~ci'e~ore. von ask peonlc to think creatively, to think innovatively. u~l thiS is pretty hard to do. I think we have done pretty well in terms o~ ral leras iii I lus area. home of the proiects are pretty l)ad. Tiv c'i,c ~r. 111(1 there 1aH~ to he ~11niv oe the projects. PAGENO="0105" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDtCATION AMENDMENTS 92? You are right in a sense. but when von look at the exciting projects I hat have conie in, the 1,11(H) projects, of those 100 or ~O() are startling in their creatively, scope and organization, so it seems to me we have enough goo(l Out of this whole kettle to say that the 1)ot is somewhat I ~eginning to simmer. It is not boiling yet and I think it would be too early to ask it to l)Oil after just one year. Mr. Qvir. Wlat do von envision in the future ? You talk about fiscal year ltlT~ as S~i.2 billion. That is a substantial increase over present funds. I imagine you envision something much greater, even more varied than we have right now. ~11Oui(l we expand further than is being contemplated Mr. MILLEn. The two basic projects, supplementary centers and the projects. both have to be. expanded, I think, considerably. Actually, the funding has been a problem in ternis of just the number of proiects to be. approved. I think they should be expanded dramatically. It is succeeding, in our opinion, in terms of the people who have studied it, and certainly it is addIng something, an element in most schools that has not been there. I think if you ~o out into many of the States and talk to the title III people. you will see what we found. These are interesting proj- Y(~t5. The important thing is the people involved. I think when you reHlv get (lown to it, we capture some people by the excitement of the idea. Fherefore. it' III goes into the area of llee(ls without being innova- ti ye, we are really moving in a troublesome direction, in my opinion. \Ve need to keep creativity and innovation, and the process of change pretty foremost in these proJects. But they are far from perfect. In no way would we want to say that there haven't been some bad projects, there haven't, been some political aspects there. But when you take the whole kettle, I think it is pretty good. Tf von focus on one aspect in terms of the bad projects. you are going to get one picture. We tried to look at the total as best we could. Mr. Qiur. You put a great (Teal of emphasis on creativity of the individual on the local school district, and if we are actually to do a 1ob we. have to harness them. I share your feelings in that. But I also get the impression, and perhaps ou could tell me. if I get the right impression, that von clout feel the same way about the State departments of education, or the possibilities. A number of col- leagues seem to share that view, that there isn't much pOSsil)illty of creal ivitv in the State departments of education to accomplish this so von need the Federal relationship directly with the local school dis- trict and there the creativity of the individual with the whole system can be seen. Mr. Mii~vru. The sutt~estion that 4 Twmcemit be allocated to State cle- partments is in recognition of the importance of stm'engthmenin~ State departments. There is quite. a lengthy section in this State-Federal relationship. I think the Important thiin~r is that the partnership he strengthened considerably. So, in a sense, 4 percent would allow them to (To sonic things in terms 0 ~ personnel. some of their own research. studies, e on ferences. things PAGENO="0106" 92S ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTCATION AMENDMENTS they wanted to do in order to stimulate title III. This would help considerably. But I go back again in terms of the job definition, a man assumes in a job prett.y much determining what he can do. Most State de- partments have not geared themselves up to do the exciting, innova- tive. creative types of work that are better done in universities at the local level. I think it is a frank recognition of the role of the State departments, as I said before; it is a vital role. It should be increased. We need to up the salaries. I have been very strong in my feelings toward the role of the State departments. But my point is innovation and creativity, with the exception of some, is an area which they have not gotten into. They will have to retool a bit to do it. As I say, there have been exceptions. I think Texas has done a fine job. They have set up an associate commission- er for planning and development. How many State departments have done this? Mr. BRADEMAS. Will the gentleman yield at that point? Mr. QtIE. Yes. Mr. BRADEMAS. Isn't it possible that the problem we are all con- cerned with here: namely. how do you get the best job done in meeting the purposes of title III, is really not so much ideological as it is chronological, that is to say that Mr. Quie, who wants to see a larger role for the States in title III and I, who have been skeptical about the mandatory veto, might. not really be at odds at all with respect. to what you are talking about, or what Mr. Hitt is talking about. We all want to see the State departments of education greatly strengthened. I certainly do. What you are saying. I take it. Dr. Miller, is that you are not op- posing strengthening the State departments of education; you say you want to see them stronger; and I think Dr. Hitt takes the same position. I certainly can see that. All I am concerned about is that we not at~ this particular point put that much power in them. If they get much stronger, let's say, in 3. 4. or .` years. with additional title V funds, then it might well be that the State departments of education ought to have precisely the kind of role that Mr. Quie is suggesting. I don't think Mr. Quie and I are at odds on a strong State depart- ment of education in this, if that is a fair observation. Mr. QFw. I would also say that I am not arguing for a Governor's veto or a State (lel)artment of education veto. I think this is a sys- tem of last resort that we utilized in the poverty program, and it is a very valid one. What I am talking about is the State department of education assuming responsibility. I think where the difference comes is that m colleague from Indiana would like to see the State department strengthened so they could assume the responsibility. I say, let's give them some responsibility and the tools with which to do it, and then they are going to learn how to handle it. Mr. BRADEMAS. I would sign my name to the statement that Mr. Quie just made. PAGENO="0107" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 929 Mr. QIJIE. I would like to see every State required to devise a State plan which they would submit to the Commissioner for approval to accomplish what I would observe California has accomplished. I understand Texas has done well with title III, as well, though I am not familiar with it. I am familiar somewhat with the 19 experi- mental centers in California. Just the idea of doing some State planning, it seems to me, will make this program much more effective. The helter-skelter way it has operated so far is that it has brought in some programs zeroed in on the purposes of title III, but there are too many which are not. it seems to me what you said would happen has happened. making it too much like title I. If you had this Federal-local relationship and it~ has not been perfect, I say let's take a try at strengthening what we believe should be the optimum of a strong State department of education. Could I ask one other question, and that is to get an understanding of what~ von meant by title III and title IT should be closely related both at the local and Federal levels. I don't believe you elaborated. Mr. MILLER. I said I and IV, I believe. Did I say TI ? Mr. QUIE. Here it says title III and title II should be closely related both at~ the local and Federal levels. Mr. MILLER. Where did I say that? Mr. QUIE. On page 16 of your statement. You have two pages of recommendations, or a summary of the recommendations of the over- view section. And then No. 16 on page 1. Mr. MILLER. That is very interesting. I think it is a mi~print. I think it should be IV. In fact, I am sure it should be IV. Mr. QmE. I can understand that a~ little better. Mr. MILLER. I would certainly concur that III and II should be, however. It is just that I didn't look into II. But IV I was con- cerned with, about regional labs, and I. Also, there is a study of the relationship of I and III in the volume. We went. into the relationship of how well these are being related at the local level. So, I have been personally concerned about this in the study. Mr. QITIE. I have some questions of Sister Farrell and I feel it is too bad she has not been questioned more. My colleagues should have their time first. Mr. STEIGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Mr. Quie. May I ask, Dr. Miller, what Wisconsin's standing is insofar as title III? Mr. MILLER. Sir, Wisconsin stands very high in everything. My wife happens to be from northern Wisconsin, so I have no choice in the matter. I really cannot say. I visited the center at Manitowoc. I know of the work in Milwaukee. What I have seen has been good. I am not avoiding the question, but I simply do not know. Mr. STEIGER. Do we have a full-time title III administrator? Mr. MILLER. Without going back to my figures, I could not say. My recollection is yes, but don't hold me on that. I am not certain. I could check it quickly, but I don't have the figures with me. Mr. STEIGER. The discussion between my colleagues from Indiana and Minnesota on what is the relationship and the role of the State PAGENO="0108" 930 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATIOX AMENDMENTS depitrtinent. let me read a statement that was made by the superim tenclent of public instruction in \Visconsin and his chief deputy, and 2'et VOIlI coninients. and those of Dr. Ilitt.. He said We support the conversion of Title III of the Elementary and ~econclary Education Act to a state olan operation which will permit each state to adinin- ister its plan of supplementary services and centers. Sl)e('iti(allv. is this what von think we ought not 10 (10 under the jae~eiit (ireuhiistances. imsed Ofl ~0ilt stiiilv Mr. MTLu:n. Yes. I tb not think we are ready for this vet. I think ~t \Volnd be a real mistake at this point, to turn over tit Ic III to the ~i ate departmueiit s. I would state from my experience that it would, in a sense. piobal 1v destroy the spirit of title 111 at t lie present time, to urn it over to all the St ate tlepartnients, en masse. This is different Lam what I said earlier, turning over selective]v on an experimental basis to t hose that we recognize. I know tire pal it ica I problems of recognition here., but it seems to Inc that treating all the. States alike, if you had to do it all or none, ti~eii 1 would ~iiv none. lint I much prefer saving 1et~s try it on the. basis. of a tow. and pelilaps chronologically, as they develop, which certain lv ii su~ )port ye j~\~ fut IV. Ti icy slioiiltl (levelop imiuch greater ~tieii~tli. ilien a avbe it con be moved a little niore in that direction. Mi. ~Tni( En. I )o von have ni ~v (dii iimemil s. I )r. flit t ~\[i iEi'ir. Yes. TI eie has I een iii te a bit of talk al ont the weakness of State depart- nients. I \VOii1(l like to 1)oiflt out one. thing, that in the past 3 years there. has been a very substantial strengthening of State departments of education. If we are going to follow through with strengthening, organizations or people st iengrhen as they get. responsibility. `l'his is the reason I 1)1oposed that 50 percent-I wouldn't quibble fll)Olii the percentage-or some have the responsibility, some. portion of title III, should be moved into the State departments to give them that respOnsiI)ilitv. l)ec~luse it is through the exercise of responsibility that they continue to strengthen and grow. As we operate with the Office of Education, it is not going to bother Texas one way or the other, because we have a working relationship worked out and we work with our people constantly in planning their title III projects so that we are. involved in the grassroots planning of these projects and in their implementation. On the poInt of how much resource they put in it, in our State we feel like title III is an integral part of our overall planning effort. for education in the State. W~e not only have a full-time person working with it, but when we. come to the review period we may involve 30 or 40 of our other staff people in the operation. We. will assign staff personnel to monitor these projects as they operate so that. we know what is going on in the projects. I think this is the way a State department should work. It should be a full partner in the operation. TTnless we move, in that direction, if you wait ~ years von will he in the same posif~on you are ii now, possibly. The involvement of people and organizations is what I think strength- ens lt. Mr. STEIGEFi. Dr. Torrence. in your statement. you said that we must devote further atteiut ion to exploratIon of the question of motivation of voting people who might not now go to college. PAGENO="0109" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLCATION AMENDMENTS 931 I was interested j11 vo~r stle5sin~ the (01 iege-i )OUhld stiide~~t without really. Pel'lml)s because of time, devoting much time. to the 11011-college- l)Ouhld 4udent. T)o von have any comments or do you wish to make any comments ~1 )out. what we call (10 to provide the motivation in our society for the iioiicoilege bound, on what our programs are that we have undertaken, or whether we siumid expand in this area I airi concerned that we. have been so coiIe~~e-bound nmtivared that we have, tended to dOwnplay the. importance of a vast scgmeiit. of our society that does not choose to go to college or perhaps would not l)e as suited to go to college. What is your concern here and what are your ideas? Mr. TOITiRENCE. This is a great concern of mine, also, the way we seem to be moving into society. It simply almost requires now, or it will soon, some college. edu- cation for a peison to have a successful, a ple~isant. and a wholesome. life. I think to some extent this is regrettable. I think to a large extent. requirements for employment out of I)ilase are not in Laiinony with what is required to do certain 1obs. But in order to even be considered for certain ]olis, an thing less than high school is out. of the question, and in iiianv cases college training is required. I don't think in many of these jobs college training is require.l in terms of proficiency of the pelsoil to do the work. Though this may never happen. so long as college traIning is re- quired for so many of the jobs of today, then it. becomes a concern of mine that more and more people have the opportunity and are motivated to accept this opportunity to go to college. I think that the high schools, the elementar schools and high schools, have riot been successful in helping to get students motivated, those who are capable of going to college, and who could receive the necessary financing to go to college. They are not motivated for one rea~oii or another to take advantage of it. Mr. STErnER. When you (liscUSs, college, are you talking here about the liberal arts type of college, or can we provide some. leadership and shifting of emphasis to tile junior college-technical institute type of training which may give them an associate degree, for example, which can lea(l to some wholesomiie employment (your words) , in our society? Is this what you are talking about Mr. TORRENCE. I am talking about both. I think the junior college or the community college, the. technical institute type of college cdii- cation, is quite appropriate for some. l)e01)le, and needs certainly aie tremendous and great, and tile opportunities are great. A large imm- her of youths are not taking adavntage, however, of these. opl)or- t.unities. Mr. STErnER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Scherie. Mr. S(I IEI1LE. Thank you, ~\[r. Chairman. Dr. Torrence, I believe I would like to pursue this matter a little further, if I may, with i'egard to college training, college. instruction, and college graduates. PAGENO="0110" 932 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS I feel, to a certain extent, also, that this has probably been pushed and emphasized a little too much. I believe that there are three reasons. perhaps, why people do not attend college. One would be, perhaps, that they are not academically inclined; their fmancial status may not allow them to attend ; and. then, perhaps, they may have no desire to attend. Someone asked me the other day, particularly in this field of educa- tion, why do you go to college, and he said, `Well, to better myself so that I can make ~5OU or $6U0 a month." 1 asked, `J{ave you hired an electrician or plumber lately ?" The field is initially not white collar, but it is certainly blue collar. I think that we must, in the field of vocational education, clear up a void that has existed for many, many years from high school to college, and provide those who do not attend college the opportunity to become blue-collar workers if they have no desire to become white- collar workers. I noticed also in your remarks this other point, about which I would like to ask you a question. You stated in your remarks: There has been blatant opposition to compliance with this under the guidelines of the TJ.S. Office of Education by many states. Do you feel that the handling of the educational system in your State has been a blatant violation in regard to the law as we recognize it on the books today? Mr. TORREXCE. In the State of Alabama, sir? Mr. ScIJERLE. `les. Mr. TUIiIiENCE. `les, Sir. Mr. SCHERLE. And this money is federally controlled and admiiiis- tered? That is, to your State? Mr. TORRENCE. My response to you was not with regard to title III funds. I do not think this is true with regard to title III funds, with regard to the programs funded under title III in Alabama. Mr. SCHERLE. But you do feel that in some regard in the educational facilities your have been shortchanged in Alabama Mr. TORRENCE. Yes, sir. Mr. Sc1TERr~. And because of this assumption, you feel that you will be given more consideration if the controls and guidelines were established and held by the Federal Government rather than the State department of public instruct ion? Mr. TORRENCE. les, sir. Mr. SC1LERLE. Do you recall, I believe last year or ~ years ago, where in the State of Illinois S30 million was withheld for a period of time ~~ecause of so-called segregation in schools existed ~[r. TORRENCE. I recall reading about this. Mr. SCHERLE. This money is being sent down in a certain percentage to all States. If this is a clear violation of the law, why wouldn't this also have been clone in Alabama? Mr. TORRENCE. Sir, I don't know the answer to that. Mr. ScHERLE. If I may move from questioning you to Sister Miriam, I have one question. I notice j~ your testimony. Sister, that von feel von would like to see title V expanded to include statewide educational planning. PAGENO="0111" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 933 I also notice in your remarks, particularly to stay compatible with my previous questions: My current experience in a migratory area applauds your extension of this program to migrant groups. This would not only benefit the children of migratory worliers. It would enable the local school system in this instance to improve its stability and its effectiveness in this education of children of the permanent community. By this, I gather that you also have problems in the field of educa- tion in regard to transients that conie and go in the area where you live? Sister FARRELL. Yes, Mr. Scherle; we do, simply because they are migratory. They are accepted into the school system readily on a tentative basis. I observe that the teaching leaves a great deal to be desired because they are there only a short time. In the particular area in which I am currently working, the Lower Santa Clara Valley, they leave in the fall, after the prunes. Certain classes are dismantled and there are few children left. The school, I gather, has to be reorganized and reset up. Mr. SCHERLE. Do you feel that even though these are migratory workers that they are considered for the full extent of education as possible in budgetary and fiscal appropriations? Sister FARRELL. Are you speaking of title III, Mr. Congressman? Mr. SCHERLE. Either one of the two. Sister FARRELL. First of all, title III hasn't seeped down to our particular area even though the State has a very splendid plan. Head- start, under the OEO, is beginning to be quite effective in this particular area. I gather that the California Education Department is quite com- petent. But also it has a tremendously large job to handle, partic- ularly in these areas where there are transients. These people are moving up through the two valleys, of course, I don't observe any effective approach currently to the solution of this problem of the migratory workers. Mr. SCHERLE. You don't feel in your own mind, then, that because of the situation as it exists and is known to the State Board of Pub- lic Instruction, that there is any discrimination at all in regard to the education that they should be entitled to? Sister FARRELL. No; validly, there is no discrimination. However, I don't see any approach to the problem. The problem exists. These children a.re handled as they go up the valley. But I feel that this is not the answer. I speak from the viewpoint of a schoolteacher. I think we all know when children come in they are in the classroom for 6 weeks and then move over and have another teacher for 6 weeks. This is the situation in which they are existing for most of their elementary education, at least. Mr. SCITERLE. To pursue this a little further. then, knowing this. the possibility of many of them becoming college entrants is remote? Sister FARRELL. Very remote. Mr. SCITERLE. Then how is your vocational program in Calif~~nia? Sister FARRELL. I am riot prepared to give you an overall picture of the vocational program. I know something is Ijeing done. But PAGENO="0112" 934 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTTCATION AMENDMENTS if we were speaking of the migratory workers, I would say this i~ velv remote. I don't think they are iii areas w1~ere vocational centers are a y('e~aible to them. I would think if the sugQestion in the recent amendments to ESEA would become law, this would present a tremendous potential resource for this type (if thing. Mr. Sc i j n~n;. Thank von very much, Sister. (`onlnhissioner I [itt, I would like to approach one subject iii your lest unoiiv to ci arifv a sIt iial Ion in mv own mind. iou alsO make lie statement that it is our belief that title V of ESEA should not he aniended to estalilisli a sel)arate program for educational planning wit Ii separate funding. Do von have referein'e to some of the infiltration or cohesiveness 01' 1')) 11)atibllitv of working with the OEO along with your educa- tlunal svsteiii~ ~\[i. I lrr'r. No. This was not involved in my remarks at all. Mv at einci it in t h veu'ard was based on one thing, that in as much as we (To have a Federal law that has full authorization-I believe an- ~( iii zat ion up to ill most twice as niuch as was iippropr~ated-that does provide for educational planning. that the need does not exist lor a seicirate statute to provide for this function. Ilie 1)1'OViSiOfl is alrea(lv made in the I~ederal statute. Mr. Scl-iEriLE. Let me a~k von this question, then, concerning Head- sI a it. I)o von have that Mr. Tim'. Yes. Mr. ~cJ[EnLE. ioii would like to see this moved or changed from its existing department to the educational field, would you Mr. TIm. I think it would work more smoothly as it really relates to i he 1)nbhic schools. I think if I polled our superintendents through- out the State. the administrators in the State. they would rather be dealing with the State agency in their clii'ect relationship. Mr. ~C1IEIlLE. here is a situat]on where the money is funded directly, isn't it? Mr. Him'. That is right. Mr. ~CJIETiLE. An(l not through the ~tate department of public instruction Mr. Hm. That is right. Mr. ~C1TERLE. What is our anal `sis or appraisal of this type of ediu'ation being funded dii'ectl . bypassing the Governors, the State legi~latures. all the wa dow'n to the local level Mr. HITT. It does not. iii effect. bypass the Governors. In our State we have established a division of OEO in the Governor's office. Every appli~'at ion for au OE() grant dealing with education is referred to our ( )ffice for i'eview and comment and referred hack to the Gover- nor. ~o we (10 have infoi'mation in our files and in the hands of our staff so that they caui he involved with the operation of this 1-leacistart pi'ograu ii thi'oiiglioiit the St ate. We th i uk I iii~- is inlpOi'taflt, that our staff' he informed and involved inn' the (level Oh )ments (~f the~e programs. W~e accomplish this through this (0()1)eri~tiVe relationship with the Govei'nors. Mr. ~c'iiru~i,r. In the sense of the word, then, you do have control 1 ecanse of aulili at ion with the executive branch in your State ? PAGENO="0113" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS 935 ~\Ir. hire. \Ve doiit have control. We d I ave ii Vo:ce Iii the p10Jec1~. Mi. ~ IFIILE. We (Toil t i~n oitiinatelv. 1 on I a at sure ~ve \V1j 1. I have one qIl Mall for 1)i. Miller. I-ion- is Inwa lin.iiu finley I itle III? i\[1. MTLLFII. ~ are 1~U iii V by il~-S( flIt 11011. I 11111 {i fill ~"~eI )lit-k11 so I can talk a little hit about Iowa. I think they have c-I :Wlis]ied 11 in IV. nit cle~1 ii system ot (1 i~triets, lnterimaolj ate sri]ut 5. flI Iowa, and they ale. ~on~ to hook this ii. ~o I think it i~ laster lo talk about iowa in tentis of n-hat they are 1)lannhIu~ to (10. Afltli1IlhV. thiS \V0liJ(l he soitiew-1i~it like hey ale doing in Texas. I think this has gleat ploillise. It is soniet]iiiig like vhiat they did iii Peiiiisvlvonia. Mi. S inu~ir. Thank you very much. 1i~i~ik von. Mi. CI~aiiiiiaii. Cliii ilman Pi:s i~ ixs. Mrs. Green. ~ris. (b~ra:x. ~n-ter Miriam, von ore a ~iiperviso1 (Jt Si~Oois. I.t0\V large a geogra plural a rca in ( al i torn ia Sister Fai~i~ria. At that tjme we handled 14 count ies and jil the In st vear-the last 3 years it has been broken up into four dioceses. Mis. GREEN. ihat wa~ in the northern California area, the 14 COlill- ties? Sister FallilElL. That is right. Mrs. GREEN. how long has it been s~nce you have been slinervisor Sister FARRELL. Six years, I have been acting as coitsu}~~, how- ever, in the office subsequent to that time. Mrs. GREEN. I would like now to turn to Mr. Tlitt. since my ques- tion is over legIslation adopted in the last 2 oi Ii years. Where is the regional education office that serves Texas? Mr. i-lEFT. Dallas. Mrs. GREEN. Do you have a regional education lab ? Mr. Hirr. Yes. Mrs. GREEN. Where? Mr. HITT. It covers Texas and Louisiana. It is located in Austin. Mrs. GREEN. Do you have an R. & D. lab? Mr. I-lIFT. Yes, on the campus of the TJniversitv of Texas. Mrs. GREEN. Do you have suplemeutary centers in Texas? Mr. HITT. I believe you came in after I had given my testimony. We are establishing 20. Last Monday the State board of education adopted policies that established 20 regions, each of which will be served by a center, a service center. Mrs. GREEN. Then in Texas you have the State department- of edu- cation, one R. & D. lab as a result of this Elementary and Secondary Education Act, and you have one regional eduaction lab ? Mr. HITT. That is correct. ~\[rs. GIIEI:N. Also, von have. plans for 20 supplementary centers Mr. IIITT. That is right. Mrs. GREEN. What is the relationship now between all of these ? ~s[r. lIFT. Let~s take the. regional lab. When we started coopera- tive ~)lalinillg for a. lab in this region. the Fniversitv of Iexas- Mrs. GREEN. This is the R. & D. lab? Mr. I-Tirr. No. this is the regional education 101). 7i-492----fii---1t. 2---S PAGENO="0114" ~36 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS The University of Texas dean of education made one of his staff people available. We made office space at the university and A. & M. university sent one of their people over to assist. rfhe university at Baton Rouge, La., sent a person to work with us. Cooperatively we developed a plan for a laboratory to cover these two States. During the review period we then created a nonprofit cor- poration under the Texas law. Mrs. GREEN. How did you happen to establish a private, nonprofit organization? How did you happen to use this format? Mr. Hirr. We felt this was the most feasible and workable way to operate this kind of an institution in the States. Mrs. GREEN. Was it suggested by anybody? Was there direction on this? Mr. HilT. No, this evolved out of our planning there in the Texas Education Agency with the university groups. On this board for the lab, in this private corporation, we have the commissioner of education from Texas, the commissioner from Louisiana, the chancellor of the University of Louisiana, the chancel- lor of the University of Texas, representation from A. & M. College. We. have outstanding lay citizens on this lab board. So they have a 23-man board, with a representative of labor, of industry, of edu- cation, trying to get a complete cross section of the educational com- munity and the lay community of the two States. The lab is operating in very close cooperation with our department. Mrs. GREEN. What is it doing, specifically? Mr. Hirr. Its focus was on the needs of the inner cultural groups in the society of these two States. It will tune in to work on problems relating to the migrant, the Latin American culture as it exists in Texas, for instance; the French groups that influence the Louisiana society; the Negro as a part of the society of both States; of moving into the area of teaching education or teacher education; moving into the area of retraining of teachers. Mrs. GREEN. Do they actually train teachers? Mr. HVFr. You see, our lab was one of the last ones established. Mrs. GREEN. When was it established? Mr. Hirr. About 10 months ago, when they were in the planning grants. They were recently approved for a 22-month operational grant. Mrs. GREEN. Let me ask von specifically. Is there anything that the regional education lab is doing that the State. department of ed- ucation in Texas could not do if they had the same funds Mr. Hjrr. The answer to that question is "No." Mrs. GREEN. Then why do we set up another agency? Mr. Hirr. But there are areas in which they can move that would he more difficult for the department to move in. Mr~. GREEN. What. area, specifically, and why would it be more difficult? Mr. Hirr. I suppose tradition would he part of it. Mrs. GREEN. Specifically, what area can they move in that the State department could not, if they had the funds, if they had the same money? Mr. T-TJTT. Mrs. Green, I can't answer that. I don't believe that there is any area that they are working in at the moment that our de- PAGENO="0115" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLCATION AMENDMENTS 937 partment~ could not work in. We have a rather broad-based legal base under our department. Mrs. GREEN. If we say we want to strengthen the State department of education and then by action we set up a competing organization charged with the same responsibility but. with a. heck of a lot, more money and with no limitation on how they can siphon off personnel from other agencies, what are we doing? Are we doing what we say we want to do'? Mr. HITr. It. will be in pilot program development, of additional in- volvement.. We are operating more or less as partners in attacking these problems. The reason we wanted the lab is that it gave us more resources that could be brought. to bear on these Problems more quickly. Mrs. GREEN. It. is largely examination, isn't it, and not much ic- search Mr. Hjrr. It will be in pilot program development, of additional in- stiuction materials, suited to the needs of these particular cultural groups. Mrs. GREEN. Have you not been doing this in the State department? Mr. I-EdT. Yes, we have, but by having the.n both forces at work we can get them done more quickly. In other words, we were trying to multiply our resources when we conceived the idea of moving into a laboratory. Mrs. GREEN. You said that you strengthen the State departments of education with the exercise of responsibility? Mr. HurT. We have not withdrawn from the field, but we are not duplicating each other. They are w-orking in one field and we are working in another. Mrs. GREEN. But I thought you said you had been doing exactly the same thing as the regional lab? Mr. Hirr. We are working in the same general areas. Fnder our legal authority, we have legal authority to do anything that they are doing now ~ we. do not have the resources to do all that are under- way at this time. Mrs. GREEN. And if we give, you the same resources? Mr. HTTT. We could do them. Mrs. GREEN. Wliy would it not he better to have one set of books. one administrative proceduiie and give the State department the re- sources that we give to t.he R. & D. lab? Mr. lilT F. This is not the II. & D. lab. This is the regional labo- rat ory. Mrs. GREEN. I am sorry. The regional education lab? Mr. Iiirr. This would work either way. Mrs. GREEN. Which way would it work better, if you want to strengthen the State departments? Mr. HITT. I think we should do both. Mrs. GREEN. ~1'ou do? Mr. lEFT. Xes. Mrs. GIiEEN. You want a competmg agency? Mr. Hirr. It is not cOfllpeting. Mrs. GREEN. I won't say competing. But. you want another agency with more fuiids that is doing exactly what you could do ? Mr. I-IITT. Let me try to phrase it. this way. There is room in the area. of eduda~ ion in the Southwest for the laboratory and for the State PAGENO="0116" 9~S ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATIOX AMENDMENTS l.epartlilellts of eduieatio~i to operate in accordance with an overall plan for I he unuroveulenit Hi eduation. ~ii1( ~il1i I)~ work~iig on some phases of this while we are working oil other phases. Xli of this will come together into a total plan and operation. We are staving very close to the laborator iii all of its 1)1 11111 mE il(t: Vi ties 1 0 he sure tlimtt our plaun ilig and their planning ire pain] id ii and t hat we ale connhlg out with something that will imive nit liiipilct oil the needs of that region. The it ~ 1). center at the Fniversitv of Texas is concentrating its etiorts in the area of teacher education, carrying on experimental work ifl a nullll)er of the 5(11(01 systems to prove up some of these new p1~c- t ices in eolucat ion. They are working in the field of engineering at these piactzes so that the cail be transniirted throughout the State. (inn re~tiona I service centers are going to serve a very important role as tile (hisseininatiilg agent of helping to transplant these new praetlces out of the school s stein in winch they have been pIo\e11 Ti]) over into tiie other Pi~1t5 of the State so that we get a widespread ila])lenlentiltIon of these new ideas and new practices. ~ rhere is 100111 with the nunll)er of youngsters we have and the size of the territory to iover for all thi~ee to play a very vItal role in lie development of new practices in education for the improvement of educat ion, and 1 Oi1i~ about the changes we all feel needs to be made. ~o it iS not ai~ either or in my thinkinR. If any lab is operating in rompetition wmth a ~tate department. then I think we are in trouble. \Ve have done evervthiiiig we can to make sure this does not happen. It is all one operation one effort. Mrs. (hii:rx. I agree there is enough work to keel) a lot of I)eOP1e busy. But if I follow your logic, then let's set up a lot of different agencies so we would have a better chance of getting them done. If there is enough work for three agencies to do, I think there. would he argument that there would be enough work for 10 agencies to do. *\U~v not set up 10 in Texas Mr. ll~rr. We could use them. Mrs. (Tm:Ex. And on would again favor that Mr. IIirr. No. I did not say I would favor it. I think we have all we need at the moment. Mrs. GIlEEN. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Brademas. Mr. Bw~Dr~r\s. Thank von very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. T-Iitt, following some of the questions that Mrs. Green has asked which I think are quite relevant to the whole new look we are seeing, is it fair to say that there are many programs that have been passed in the field of education in the last several years of our country that authorize support for elementary and secondary, for preschool educa- tion and hi~lier education, that legally could have been undertaken by States a long time ago? Mr. TuFT. That is correct. Mr. BRADE~L\S. But they were not. We are all familiar with some of the reasons that they were not. I take it that you are not advocating that we should not have had the NDEX of l9~S and tile several ~)1OgIam5 that it authorized to hem sIl~)port our elementary and secondary schools, or our eollege~ PAGENO="0117" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDT.CATION AMENDMENTS 939 and universities, although States could very well have undertaken ~iicli progi'~ims, could they not ? Mr. I~IITT. That is correct. Mr. BRADEMAS. I am against the waste and duplication of unnec- essary effort, which I guess is like being against sin. But I am very much concerned, as Dr. Miller phrased it, that we get the job done. I am sure you have a lot of oil in Texas and you could raise a few taxes on that oil to do some of these jobs. But I am not, unaware of the political difficulties in State legislatures. We could even lower the depletion allowance on oil right here in the Congress, but I am not going to hold my breath until that is done. Let. me ask a question, Sister, of you, aiid also of Dr. Miller. What about the relationship between public, school systems and private, in particular church related, organizations in title III programs? Have, you any comment on that.? Sister FAERELL. I would say that ESEA certainly has worked out as it was intended to, that we have participated, and I think that in the overall picture of the projects, of course, they have not been awarded unless there has been some indication of this participation. I might inject, here that I think we should define our terms. I think State planning is consistent. with the law as it is now in California. Because of the State plan it. has not seeped down to the area we are, but we are currently working on a project. I would say it looks very good. I would caution this, however, that I think that even this morning's discussion being subject. that. we bypass the real spirit and intent of this law, which was to the child. Sometimes we get l)ogged down in all of this of who is doing what. But what is happening to the child? We are trying to (10 some- thing for the American child. IVe are trying to set up a service. I hope we will never lose this vision. I suspect, too, with the constant rewriting of guidelines we are in danger of losing this perspective. We turned over the spotlight, to the child in ESEA with some of the rewriting of the guidelines it tends to suggest that we are getting back to this institutional approach which I hope will never happen. Getting back to your basic question, there has been participation. 1 mght add that this ESEA has given us who are involved in the other parts of the American scene, the educational scene, in a plu- ralistic soc~ery, an opportun~tv to exhibit the real philosophy that. we have always tried to exhibit. In other words, we try to he a service and a resource to the com- munity we serve. This is our philosophy. ESEA has given us an opportunity to exhibit. this much more readily than was l)OsSible, let's say, in 1949 when this was a real touchy delicacy. Thank vou. Mr. BRADEMAS. Dr. Miller. Mr. MTr~Lni. I concur fully with what. Sister Miriam Joseph has ~a 1(1 about the private-public relationship. They are growing. They are. uncertain. This is a new area. But we have some good examples of where this is being worked out. ~\[r. l.\T)EM.'~. Dr. ~flller. what about time relationship between t itle ITT and title TV prog nw as your survey (lc\elol)e(i ? From \vllat PAGENO="0118" 94() ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDtCATION AMENDMENTS I can judge. you have done about the only systematic survey of the way title III programs have in fact been working out over the coun- try. Have you any general findings on the relationships between the two titles, or recommendations? Mr. MILLER. Yes. I might also add that I think I have done a rather systematic study of the title IV, one of the few that has been done. I have looked at this title even before title III. I think the relation- ship there is very interesting. I was interested in the discussion about the situation in Austin in particular. In the overview volume, there are two case studies of the inter- relationship of ESEA titles, one in Boston, a title I and a title III. The other one is in Austin, Tex. I looked around for positive examples of what is being done. In Austin there is a very interesting example where a triple AAAS science inquiry project, directed by a young fellow, Dave Butts, in Austin, has caught fire. This was an example of a non-Federal program which went over very well. Then in order to get it out wider a title III project was brought in to demonstrate it. Meanwhile, the R. & D. lab at the University of Texas was doing the research on it. They were bringing teachers in to orient them, bringing teachers back to retool them. and then the regional lab was taking the results and putting them out over a wider area. This relationship is good. But the interesting thing in the Texas agency was one of the coordinating the whole operation which to me is a very legitimate function. Xo other agency could have performed the coordinating role here. I see this as a relationship of where. each aspect certainly had a role, which is not unique to it, but, in a sense, by working together, this developed a rather exciting study. It is what we should be get- ting much more of in terms of various relationships. Mr. BRADEMAS. I take it from what you just said, Dr. Miller, and what. Dr. Hitt said a. few moments ago, in response to Mrs. Green's question, that a fair characterization of your general posture in this entire area would be that we need a diversity of sources of support, thereby enhancing the prospects of creativity and higher quality, while at. the same time we need to maintain the maximum degree of coordina- tion so that we make the wisest possil)le use of scarce resour~.eS~ money, people. facilities-and that we would lose. perhaps, sona~ of those benefits if we tried to insist on a more monolithic structure for both obtaining financial support and administering programs. There have been several rhetorical questions asked here today. and now mine is among them. Have I misrepresented your attitudes? I would be glad to have any of you comment on that observation. Mr. IIITT. I would agree fully with what you have said. Really, the Texas State I)epartnient of Education plays a very heavy role in this thing of coorclin at ion. Some of the ideas are generated by our shop. Some by some of the other shops. But sooner or later we see to it that all those that have something to bring to bear on this, and some resources, do get involved PAGENO="0119" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS ~)41 in the act. This is the basis of, really one of the basic reasons I am suggesting that the State departments be involved directly in title III operations. If they are not strong enough to run, let's let them start crawling some, by giving them some responsibility. You can't coordinate this. If we did not have perfect coordination with the U.S. Office of Education we would have trouble getting these things coordinated so that~ they tie together. Mr. BRADEMAS. Mr. Miller? Mr. MILLER. I concur fully with those comments. I think it cer- tainly expresses what the consultants in the title III study felt and what my own observation would lead me to believe would be much more apparent in the future. We do have some other forces, however, such as universities, such as private businesses in some areas, that are doing inroads, and the new extent of the military as a new force in education, and certainly the new force of business. So when you analyze the whole ball of wax you have an interesting interplay of forces of which only four or five are related to Federal moneys. But others shift in and out. Mr. BRADEMAS. WTha~t we are really developing, then, it seems to me. in the. sphere of education, is something of the same kind of p~ittei'n we have in American economic life where we have an impactS on the part of private resources as well as State and local, and Federal-public resources. It is 1)aI't the. genius of our mixed economy that we have been so enormously productive, economically. One might hope that that same combination of forces would cause the same high quality arid productivity in education. Mr. I-Trr'r. Your industrial groups are moving into edueation very rapidly. Sister FARRELL. I think very frequently we miss the spirit of title III on this point. We certainly are all committed to diversity, every- one in this room. There is no question here about the fact that the State has a very definite role to play in education. But so has the Federal Government a role. I think it is precisely this sort of thing that the Federal government will be able to play its role and add this diversity. This is a title that requires an imagina- tive. mind to understand. It is not just as technical as some people here this morning might. suggest it is. `\\Te don't question the State's ability, but we do know, from our study of this title and its intent, that it needs national perspective, a national balance, a national network of centers, if we are going to realize its genius. Mr. BRADEMAS. I want to thank all of you for a most useful dis- cussion. Thank vou, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Quie. Mr. Qr~ir. Dr. }Titt, when you went through this line of organiza- tions with Mrs. Green, the H. & D. centers, the regional laboratories and the supplemental centers, nothing wa~ mentioned of the clearing- hoii~e. PAGENO="0120" ~42 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS When tIle C(mmissioner of Education testified before us, I believe lie. said there \vould be 1(.) cleallngllouseS around the country, in addi- mu to the regional labs and the R. & I). centers. 1)o von have any of those elemiriiighiouses? I assume they might be connected with ERIC. Mr. huT. We have been very active in the ERIC project. I assume lie. \vns referring to a network for dissemination purposes. our plan- niur sniff h~ eou~ nut lv developing brief descriptions of activities or special P1oie.'i 5 hai are being carried on and sending them into the .S. (.hlie fr inclusion in ERIC. The regional lab. in our case, has taken this thing of dissemination as one of their primary responsibilities. rfhley have organized so that they are statlin~ to assist in the implementation of this clearnighouse (a meration. of un()Vifl~i information out. lo 1111(1 a acci answer is no good unless we get it into the works. Mr. Ill'I1EM.\5. Which sni iiect will your clearinghouse specialize in Mr. hIlT. I dori~t know whether they have been designated. I am not familiar with tins idea af ~m clearinghouses. Mr. liP~DE~t~\S. ~s he told me, they would have all of these clear- iuaihiouses. and each one would have a different sub1ect, just as each R. & P. center has a different subject. I understand the regional labs are trying to coordinate everything? Mr. Mirvrn. That is the basic approach. There is one, for ex- ample. in the small schools in New Mexico. There is one under the vocational education at Ohio State. There are a miflhl)er of them whi uclu liave l)een desi~um~ited as clearinghouses. depositor~es of fugi- ive materials that can be then 1)ut on cards and developed in some way that can be useful. Mr. fintDr~r\s. Then we really have three. channels, don't we, through which illfOrmmlt ion is coming by an organization to the local school district? One is the State department of education which transmits a sub- stantial amount of infonnation, innovative ideas and education, anti then running from the IR. & P. centers through the regional labora- tories to the supnlemental centers and down to the. local school, and the bird way woul(l be from the R. & P. centers to the specialized clea rin~l~ouses and then to the local schools. Mr. Mir~.vn. I would say all of these. would be involved. I would emphasize the point that Commissioner Ijitt made, that this infor- unit ion i~ (f no value unless it gets to people who can use it. and will use it. Both can and will are important. Just giving a flow of informa- tion is not enough. The information needs to he packaged. This is quite. an art in itself, packa.~ing information so that. it can be used, so that svsteun~ w ill pick it up. It is not. inst. a flow that we are con- cerned ubmit. Jr is. the type, the nature of the flow, and what is said to whom and how. J would ~u1~~f~st we are still infants in the area of dissemination. We have pakuiei reams of mnaterial~ mind milhion~ of words, just sort nf ii cpi a ~ iv lie ~te11a hl 1 ~ inch ow we would ~et there. I think the centers len~ develnnel in Taxas are very e~fl~cOlT~ of the dis- seunin ation rhlevm a ad time i maplementat ion problem. PAGENO="0121" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDICATIOY AMENDMENTS 943 So it. is getting information out to be sure. but I would say that is just half of it. The. other half is the right information at the i'ight time, so it can l)e used b the right, people. Mr. BRADEM~S. With all these ventures going on at the present time which 1 just explaine(l, is there then the. necessity of coniprehen- sive planning giants, for a State agency to then be set up to make sense of all of this which is being made available? Mr. HITT. I can't answer that directly, but if you re~ognize this it is one reason why we committed so much of our title V ESE_\. money to this a.rea of planning. because if we did not gear o rselves as. a (IC- partment, through the use of title V money, to establish a planning capal)ilitv, we would not have been in a position to coordinate these many activities that are emerging. This is one~ thing that led us to establishing these ~O regional Sup- plemental centers as a State-oriented group, with State, local, and Federal financing flowing into them. So we will have a voice working closely with the~e school districts. Mr. QrTE. \Vill these new, comprehensive planning grants, if the program is enacted by Congress, enable you to (10 what von have al- ready decided to (10 with title V money? Mr. 1-Tirr. It will enable us to expand our planning capabilities and to shift some of the money now committed for this puIlose into some other areas of needs, to broaden our leadership role as a State department of education. Mr. QuIE. is there anything in the comprehensive planning grant proposal that von are not already doing? I am not saying other States are doing, but I am just referring to Texas. ~Mr. Hirr. No, the language of that act is written in broad terms and we are operating in those broad areas in each of those. Mr. QUIE. So this fits Texas the wa von have been operating? Mr. Hirr. Very well. Mr. QUTE. And perhaps it. could he said that it will then provide some. money for other States to do what Texas has done. Mr. HITT. Remember, I said I did not think we ought to splinter title V. WTe ought to leave it as one act and not set a section up for planning. It can he done the other way. Mr. QUTE. Sister Miriam, I would like to talk to you about the National Teacher Corps, if I may. This tends to be my p~ sul)lect. Sister FA1TmRELL. Are you for or against it ? Mr. QrnE. I voted against, it the last time. Let me so this, in ex- plallation that. I believe it. is wise for the Federal Government to make some expenditures in bringing people into the teaching profession who later in life indicate an intere~t in it. T think it is neces~arv for us to give special training and assistance from the. Federal level to ieach the culturally deprived children. I have no quarrel with that. I also think it is a great idea to in- volve the internship as a part. of teaching. I am faniil jar with the work of St. Thomas Colleo.'e in St. Paul. Minn.. wi!ll this same type of a training, utilizing the internship method. They only use. 1 year, however, instead of ~ ears. Time reachmers receive a master's degree at the end of 1 year of jute H~i. T under- stand an explanation will he 1)m'esente~1 from S~ Thomnii~ next week so we will ~et seine firsthand infoimuimtioii ~)n t. PAGENO="0122" 944 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS There are other parts of the Teachers Corps that worry me. First, what has your involvement been with the National Teachers Corps? Sister FARRELL. None. I just envision it as an answer to some of our problems. Mr. QUIE. I just wanted to know if I were talking to a person who was running a program? Sister FARRELL. No, it just looks very good at this point. Mr. QU~IE. You say, then, in your strong support of the Teachers Corps, "that our present culture is such that this type of dedication can be made attractive to young people who constitute a vast reservoir of talents and willingness to serve." Sister FARRELL. I got carried away in prose there, I suppose. `What I meant was that we have had experience with the VISTA workers in Santa Clara County. Most of these people come from eastern col- leges, I guess just to get to California. I observed tremendous potential dedication there. I was thinking this summer, as they worked with the migratory workers, if these. peo- ple were in the field of education what a potential power they would carry for setting up temporary schools for the children of migrant workers. When you say this in the proposed amendments, I immediately made the connection. I do think that there are young people who, if they were so motivated, would be willing to give a year or two in this area. Mr. QUTE. The reason I wanted to ask you this question, Sister Miriam, is that you are involved in an installation that has as its pur- pose the development of this dedication of people's lives. I was edu- cated in a Lutheran college and part~ of this whole thing was the teaching of dedication. Whiat has bothered me is that it is necessary evidently, in order to develop the kind of education we want to put a Federal label on a person, calling him a Peace Corps, VISTA, or a Teachers Corps man. `Why can't~ we do this, at least in the institution such as you are con- nected with, in developing that dedication? As I put~ it to many of the~ clergymen in my church, why can't peo- pie dedicated to the work of Jesus Christ he willing to do it without putting the U.S. Federal label on it, or in this case wear a tie clasp with an apple on it. or a pin for the women with an apple on it? Sister FARRELL. I can't help but agree with you, but I also have to he very realistic, that this is an ideal. We have not achieved it, have we? Mr. QUTE. I don't agree with you. I think that there are so many people (ledlicatecl in this country than we will ever see in the Teachers Corps. They are talking about 1,200,000 and 5,500.000 is what they are aiming for. This is a drop in the bucket. Tf we are to reach the socially and culturally deprived children by this method, we will never make it. We will make it by your institu- tions and by public schools, who have this dedication. That is where we have to do it. I am worried about us having one program and putting a Federal label on it. I would rather see us do a much bigger job and provide Federal assistance to help oung people go into this type of profession. PAGENO="0123" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTTCATION AMENDMENTS 94~ Why do we have to Pin the label on them? Sister FARRELL. I dont. see the distinction. I-low (10 YOU plopose to dO it? Mr. QurE. I would say it ought to be connected with the other teacher training programs. as we ale going to consolidate them all in one section, I understand, and have the money available for an insti- tuition of higher learning which wants to go into the training of teachers to reach the socially and culturally deprived, and also as a part of the working out of the internship. But they would be no different from any other. For instance, we have a Federal program for the training of guidance counselors. I don't think we ought to have a guidance counselor corps in the coun- try to get the dedication. The ~ I have met ale pretty dedicated in(lividuals. Sister FARRELL. I agree that. this can be prolifeiated beyond all sense but I was thinking more in terms of the work to l)e done. The work has to he done. It is not being (lone. There is a shortage of teachers. Sometimes I think we. can't wait for the ideal. We have to be. realistic. I have no feelings for instance for or against the National Teacher Corps as such, but I know that the work has to be done and has to be (lone soon. Mr. QFIE. I am sorry I get worked up about this. It is not. your fault at all. I thought b doing it. I might get von angry enough to chop my head off. I guess we are both following the same line aiivway. Sistei' FARIIELL. I think we are, I might. mention. apropos of what you said, that. this is the type of dedication which we try to teach. Today we are suffering, actually, because of that teaching. As I ani sure YOU know, if you read the papers. there are now fewer knock- ing at our door hccause we try to get over to the StU(iCllt5 we teach tIny have a real obligation to their countr , to their c iniliunity, to be of service, what. are they doing? They are. going into VISTA and the Peace Corps. and they are not knocking at our daois. So we are suffering from the very thing we are teaching. ~`Ir. QLIE. I also realize one piobleni iii the leacliei Corps was that tii is was tlìe most lucrative l)rogi.am of re ei vi ~i2 a masters degree tIi~t anybody could find. That kind of removes a little bit of the feeling of dedication. I know that many of them, however, are dedicated individuals. Since all of you are connected with higher education, do you think it is necessary to have a national recruitment of such individuals, or do you think if you had the programs available in the State between an institution of higher learning and the local schools the people would find there their way to it. as they presently are finding their way to a number of the other programs of education beyond the baccalaureate de~ree? Mr. Hirr. I am not really well acquainted with how the Teacher Corps operates, but I have never been able, in my own mind, to see the need for this kind of organization to do the job of getting teachers nto the. teaching profession. I think we could do the job better if the institutions were involved in it, and if the public schools were involved in it, and the private PAGENO="0124" 94~ ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS selinol ~roi1l) as well. We have not dnne too bad a job over the ears in (leveioping these personnel. (.`hairnian PERKINS. Will the gentleman yield Mr. Q EJE. I will yield to the chairman. Cha irinan PEEKINS. As a school administrator, Mr. Hirt, isn't it tine that national feeling of teachers for rile Teacher Corps is nothing, naoe or less, than a categorical approach or a zeroing in on the clis- advantage(l areas of the country? ~\Ve know it is not. the sole answer to the ~rreat shorta~e of teachers, but it is more or less a zeroing in on tIle worst disadvantaged areas of tIle country. There is not}iin~r wrong with this type of approach because the local educatioii~tl agencies have all the autonomy that they have in any other instances. Whether or not they want the interns or whether or not they want the teachers, is up to them. Do you approve of this approach i\[i'. HITT. I can't completely disagree with the a~)proach, but I tilink the point I am trying to make is that it could have been accom- p1 i shed through existing channels just as effectively through using he church-related colleges and the public colleges, the public schools and private schools to move into it. had they been given the resources ail(l the categorical requirements that are embodied in this. Mr. QFTE. I would say von are talking about something that does in )t PX st, Mr. (ha i rnian, the recruitment of these people from areas where there is a high incidence of e(lucational deprivation. These peo- l)le can come and apply for the Teacher Corps from any place. They could come from Westchester County. Chairman PERKINS. Let's take the case of New lork. The city school superintendent, I)i'. Donovan, testified a couple of clays ago that the Teacher Corps was opei'ating in 16 of the elementary and junior high schools that serve the disadvantaged areas in the city of New York, and that they had about 75 interns, and 25 or 20 team teachers in those schools, also, that the interns spent most of their weekends and extra. hours in community service mainly mixing with the students and assisting the students in many ways, that the program was very effective, fu~'theiniore, that they added stimuli in the disadvantaged areas. In the course of the program. for the training of the interns, for the training of the teachers. I believe it is particularly suitable or fitted for the (l1sadvallta~ed areas. Do you approve of that approach? Mr. JIi'rr. I see nothing wrong with the approach. The point I was making was that it could have, been done through one of two ways, either through the Corps or through the existing institutions had the money been put in their hands. Chairman PERKINs. And the. proposal here leads up to local boards of education or the local education agency as to whether they want to have the services of the interns or a team teacher, or a member of the Teacher Corps to come into the school system. Mr. ITTTT. That is eo~'rect. Mr. (~rTr. \ou a~e really not addressing yourself, Mi'. Chairman, to the ina~n d~ flerence between tiie Teacher Corps and a similar program run by an insi itrition of hiirher learning in cooperation with the local slion] (llstrjct. PAGENO="0125" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 947 There, are only two real differences. One is that the Teacher Corps man has the Federal label with the tie clasp and second, there is national recruitment. Everybody who wants to apply is then p~it into a machine and supposedly they can be selected out. of that machine or they can go \vhlere they feel like. There is really no selection of these individuals from the worst areas. And already the Teacher Corps has found out that this was a mis- take for the experienced teachers. The way they will operate in future years, they say, is that the school district, wherever possible, will ~elect the experienced teacher for their own system because then it works better that way. It is only in the school system where they have nobody intereste(l in it that they will try to select them. `\Ve have already found out that here they are wrong for the experi- ence(l teacher. Mv question is, \Vhy continue this one system of na- jot ml recruiting for the rest ~\[r. MILLER. .Actiially, the Teacher Corps should not be. needed in American education. I-lad the system been going well we would have had plenty to go into the most. difficult, the most deprived, and the schools of greatest. need. We do not have teachers to go into these schools, this is an unfortunate fact. Secondly, the Teacher Corps will not. a ppreci abl v change the tremendous quantitative need. There is no question about. it being a drop in the bucket. Thirdly, the teachers colleges themselves will not, as they are presently going, adapt. themselves quickly enough to meet the needs here. Tn my opinion, the most conservative segment in American educa- tion is in the teacher training institutions. WTe have not moved with the times. We have not moved as fast as the elementary and secondary education. Therefore, there is a critical need in the deprived slum areas, in every major city or moderate size city of America, for people to ~ro in with some background or understanding of it. The Teacher Corps does represent a drop in the bucket hut it is a forward step. One of the things that I actually see it. doing in one city, and I will not name the city, is that it is serving as a spur for the colleges to examine their own programs. They have not been training teachers to go into these areas and they know it. But. they have not clone anything about it. This is having this interesting side effect. I would, in a sense, agree to expand the ~~rogram considerably, if it is going to be done. But with the mistakes, and there are mistakes though they are correcting the program, I think it does serve a useful purpo~se on the teacher training institutions, as well as an immediate effect in terms of some of the places where it is actually in operation. Mr. QFJE. Do you think you need additional recruitment to get these peonle? Mr. MILLER. I have very mixed emotions about this. I would much Prefer doing it quietly. I just do not know. Personally, I don't think that style. This is my own personal view. Whether or not this is the right thing to do in terms of the pro~ram is another whole question. But it may well have some advan~tages that. are not apparent. The idea of recruiting people who have some experience in general area may not be a bad idea. The compensatory education program PAGENO="0126" 948 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS in San Francisco, one of the most successful ones in the country, recruits teachers from the area who are outstanding teachers. They are put right back in the area after special training. This program has been working out. It is acknowledged as the best in the country. So the national recruitment may have some disadvantages. I am speculating on that aspect of it. I don't know. Chairman PERKINS. The gentleman from Minnesota and I well know, since we have been on this committee for several years, that national recruitment is not the answer for this by any means. But I view the National Teacher Corps recruitment as more or less a pilot program, zeroing in on some of the most disadvantaged areas in the country. For instance, there is the Watts area in California, where they have institutions in the community to give these teachers special training. I am looking for the day when we can go far beyond any national recruitment and get away from that approach completely. Mr. QUIE. I share the view of the chairman on this point. Chairman PERKINS. At the moment, with this limited program, I think there is much to be gained from this approach, at the moment. Mr. Qum. If this program works out well and is expanded, I just would be disturbed if we ended up using a system of national recruit- ment to get a job done. I would like to see that dropped. Also I would be disturbed if we needed to put a Federal label on people to ~et dedication. In that case, we better get to producing a lot more pins so we can put them on everybody who requires one. Chairman PERKINS. Let me say to my distinguished colleague that I likewise would he disturbed if we would not broaden our educa- tional facilities, and do something about keeping our good teachers that leave the disadvantaged areas. Right now I know that the metro- politan areas will be the greatest beneficiaries of this program, and that the rural areas such as I represent certainly will receive very little benefit from the National Teacher Corps. But I am not disturbed about this so called label for the fact that the local school districts have complete autonomy. They make all the (lecisions For that reason, I don't think my distinguished col- league from Minnesota has anything to fear. The local school dis- tricts will make a determination as to whether or not they should have the interns or the teachers. Mr. QrTIE. My relationship of local systems of government is any- time they get something absolutely free, it looks pretty good to them. We have to also remember they don't pay one red cent for the use of these teachers. Chairman PERKINS. That is because we provide here, if they don't have the resources. I think it is well that we have this experiment. I think this experiment will bring about, sooner or later, a broaden- ing, much broadening, of the program from the Federal viewpoint to where we can provide funds and leave it to the States to do some- thing about the disadvantaged. Mr. Qum. St. Paul, Minn., already pays for the salaries of these interns on a similar program, whether or not in the Teacher Corps. To me this is greater proof of this program. PAGENO="0127" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 949 Chairman PERKINS. That is true. Now the gentleman is getting into an area where they have the resources to do that. Mr. QmE. They are a center city. You have heard what the center city people have said about their resources. They just think it is important to reach the culturally and socially deprived kids. What I am getting at is we don't have all the sensitivity on the Federal level. I was impressed with what Dr. Miller said in his statement about the parent school board support. There is just a tremendous reservoir of creativity and support here. I like to keep saying this is where the job is going to be done. `Chairman PERKINS. I think your statement is sound. I don't think we have the community, citizenry and so forth involved enough. They can make a much greater contribution than they are making at~ the present time. Mr. Qmi~. Those are all the questions I have. Thank you very much. Chairman PERKINS. Let me thank you all for your appearance to- day. We do appreciate your coming. Dr. Miller, we do appreciate copies of your study. Thank you one and all for coming. The committee will recess until 9:30 a.m., Monday morning, gentle- men. (Whereupon, at 12 :45 p.m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at 9:30 a.m., Monday, March 13, 1967.) PAGENO="0128" PAGENO="0129" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS OF 1967 MONDAY, MARCH 13, 1967 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITrEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR, Washington, D.C. The committee met at 9:15 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Carl D. Perkins (chairman of the committee) presiding. Present: Representatives Perkins, Pucinski, Hawkins, Ford, Bell, Scherle, and Eseh. Staff members present: Robert E. MeCord, senior specialist; H. D. Reed, Jr., general counsel; William D. Gaul, associate general counsel; Benjamin F. Reeves, editor; Louise M. Dargans, research assistant, and Michael J. Bernstein, minority couiisel for editcat ion and labor. Chairman PERKINS. The committee will come to order. `\\Te have with us this morning several distinguished Kentuckians. Mr. Marvin Dodson, executive secretary of the Kentucky Education Association in Louisville, Ky., will you come forward; and all the county school superintendents that have been invited by Mr. Dodson, or anyone else, please congregate around the table there the best you can. We will try to get started this morning. Proceed. STATEMENT OF MARVIN DODSON, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, KENTUCKY EDUCATION ASSOCIATION, LOUISVILLE, KY. Mr. DODSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I want to express my appreciation to your distinguished chainnan and other members of the committee for this opportunity to testify very briefly on H.R. 6230. Before getting into that, I want to say how pleased we are that you have a distinguished Kentuckian as chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee. Like t.he ad we have all seen on TV, Carl Perkins stands "10 feet tall" among school people in Kentucky. We are extremely proud of him and believe he will make a real contribu- tion to the schools of tile Nation in the position he now holds. I know that this is not the purpose of this appearance, but I could spend the time allotted to me in describing the very fine qualities which Con- gressman Perkins has. By way of introduction, I am J. Marvm Dodson, executive secretary of the Kentucky Education Association. KEA is an organization of certificated personnel in Kentucky and has approximately 31,000 mem- bers. This is about 97 or 98 percent of the potential of the qualified personnel in Kentucky. 951 75-492--67--pt. 2-9 PAGENO="0130" 952 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Since we in KEA are in no way responsible for the administration of the funds distributed under the Elementary and Secondary Educa- tion Act, nor is it the recipient of any, my testimony, naturally, will have to deal with some of my own observations and reactions which I have received from those who are more closely identified with the administration of the funds. I would like to express appreciation to the committee for what the Elementary and Secondary Education Act has meant to our schools in Kentucky. Even though KEA is on record, and has been for a long time, favoring general Federal aid with the State being allowed to develop programs within the framework of its particular needs, we believe that the Elementary and Secondary Education Act has cer- tainly brought improvements to our schools. Through the years, seri- ous attempts have be.eii made in the Congress to get general aid for public education but, as you know, it has met with defeat time after time. It is possible that this act is the only way that public education can be improved at this time. On the other hand, this does not mini- mize our conviction in the belief that. the best possible way in which the Federal Government can assist public education is through some sort of general aid with an equalization factor in the distribution formula. Most. States have developed foundation programs for the distribu- tion of State funds and, in my judgment, the bulk of Federal aid for education should come to the States under some approach similar to the foundation program laws which operate in most of the States throughout the Nation. This could be an objective formula which considers financial ability of a State with relation to its participation in Federal funds. Federal aid to education will never quite get the job done until this principle of distribution is recognized by the Congress. It is our belief that all aid for elementary and secondary education under this act should be channeled through the U.S. Office of Educa- tion and t.he State departments of education to the local school dis- tricts within the State law. As I understand it, there are presently some programs which are not. channeled t.hrough these particular agencies. For example, the Headstart program, which is currently administered by OEO, and the National Teachers Corps which is directly administered from the TJ.S. Office of Education to the local school districts are not handled in this manner. I am sure you will hear a great deal about this during the period of he.arings, but there seems to be a need for improved timing of authorization, appropriations, guidelines, and allocations. In my judgment, t.his will facilitate more effective planning insofar as pro- grams are concerned. In our State, there is still a tremendous need for school buildings and facilities. In our State, according to a recent survey, the ne,ed for classroom construction and related facilities is in the neighbor- hood of $143 million. The Kentucky Legislature, in trying to meet the increased demands for teacher salaries t.o keep them anywhere near the level they should be, has been unable to make any appropria- tion at. the State level for buildings since 1960. The lack of appro- priations by the legislature for school buildings has not only limited PAGENO="0131" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 953 the school ~ards in the.ir abilities t.o build buildings out of current revenues, but it also has limited their capacities for the. amortization of school bonds. The amount of bonds to be amortized by each dis- trict is determined by the resources which the district has for this purpose. This usually is determined by the revenue from special buildhig taxes and capital outlay funds from the foimdat ion program. Naturally, when the capital outlay fund remains constant over a period of years, the ability of a board of education to amortize school bonds is seriously crippled. Because of the factors which I have mentioned, there has been an accumulation of needs over the past 7 or 8 years which seriously impedes our education progress in Ken- tucky. Boards of education are limited by a statutory tax rate limita- tion that prohibits them from raising the necessary additional rev- enue at the local level. Let me again express my appreciation for this opportunity to ex- press my views on H.R. 6230 and also express my gratefulness to the members of this committee for what it is doing toward improvement of public education in this country. Chairman PERKINS. Let me say, Dr. Dodson, that I appreciate your coming. You and I have marched up and down a lot of mountains frequently in the direction of Federal aid to education, commencing back in l94t~ and 1950. Mr. DODSON. Right. Chairman PERKINS. I am delighted that you are making some prog- ress. We have not been able to branch out in the direction (lisdu~sed in your statement, but I feel that sooner or later we are headed in that direction. Mr. DODSON. That is good. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you for an outstanding statement. Are you going to preside over the panel? Mr. DoDsoN. I will, if you would like me to. Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Mr. DODSON. The next one, Mr. Chairman, will be Mr. G. C. Burk- head, superintendent of Hardin public schools down in Elizabeth- town. STATEMENT OP G. C. BURKHEAD, STJP~RINTENDKNT OP HARDIN COUIITY SCHOOLS, ELIZABETHTOWN, KY. Mr. BURKHEAD. Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the Education Committee: I am G. C. Burkhead, superintendent of schools in flardin County, Elizabethtown, Ky. May I express my appreciation for the onpor- tunity to present certain facts and viewpoints on the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and amendments of 1967. I would also like to request the privilege of commenting on the operation and results of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. Kentucky is a State where 24 percent of its youth are from families with incomes less than $2,000. Financing schools, even with heavy support from the State under the minimum foundation program. has fallen far short of providing the bare essentials of an adequate school program. The act has greatly aided in providing needed equipment, PAGENO="0132" 954 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS materials, books, personnel, planning, enrichment of curriculums, and, in some instances,construction. On the whole, the act has been very helpful in spite of its many weaknesses. I suggest that the law would become more effective and efficient if the following points could be given some needed study and, in my opinion, urgent attention and action. 1. The guidelines under which the present law is operating should be less stringent, giving school authorities greater choice in spending the money where it is most needed and will do the most good. 2. Much better planning and use of funds could be made if school authorities were given assurance of funds several months in advance instead of a few days. Crash programs are poorly planned and are, as a result, inefficient.. 3. Excessive paperwork under title I applications should be re- duced. For example, more paperwork has been required in the 2 years of title I operation than has been necessary in the 15 years of operation under Public Law 874. 4. The law, as it now stands, is discriminating, particularly so in large school districts. In my county of Hardin, for example, there are 13 schools: 9 of these qualify under the act, and 4 do not. School A, which is Upton, has 160 children with a qualifying percentage of 25: school B, Radcliffe, has 1,000 children with a nonqualifying per- centage of 12. In school A there are 40 economically deprived chil- dren; in school B, there are 120 children who are economically de- prived, and these 120 children are denied any benefit under title I of the act. Thus the greater number of children in school B are denied, while the smaller number in school A are favored. This is not. true in a district which has only one school, for in such a district no one is denied. This discrimination is as unjust as the "Colonial Saw" which provided a fine for the rich man and lashes for the poor man for the same offense. This should be corrected so that every underprivileged child has the same opportunity regardless of where he resides. It is recognized that we could have elected to choose the schools which have the greatest numbers rather than using the percentage method in choosing. This would have denied the smaller, poorer school of the aid which it so desperately needed. In a sense, therefore, there was no choice. 5. The OEO Community Action Committee requirements should be changed in reference to selecting personnel. Presently, this is in conflict with Kentucky State law which provides that the superin- tendent of schools must recommend all personnel. The program should be administered by a single agency if it is to be most effective. Chairman PERKINS. Before you leave No. 4, what method do you use in locating the educationally deprived in your hometown under the guidelines ~ Mr. BURKITEAD. The principals and teachers select the children. They know the children well enough to know whether they are eco- nomically deprived. Chairman PERKINS. Do you have a census as to the income of the families, or something like that~ Mr. BURKHEAD. Mainly through the welfare agency in the county we are able to determine how many. PAGENO="0133" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 955 Chairman PERKINS. Do you mean to tell me that the guidelines have prevented you from giving assistance to one of your communi- ties where you ha.ve two school systems with 120 educationally de- prived children? Mr. BURKHEAD. That is right, Congressman. You either have to take the. percentage method or the numbers method. That is the guideline. We made a desperate effort to get Radcliffe qualified, be- cause 75 percent of those children at the Radcliffe School are federally connected. The children there are deprived educationally because they have been in schools all over the world, but we failed. I am not sure that. that is the guideline from the Federal level or the State. level. Chairman PERKINS. How is the income in general of the school where you have the 120 that were denied participation, compared with the income level of the other school districts that do participate? Mr. BURKHEAD. The income is much higher in the area of Fort Knox, because the Upton School is in the southern part of the county and largely agricultural. Chairman PERKINS. The reason that the school did not qualify is that it is in the Fort. Knox area? Mr. B~RKHEAD. But the 120 children there are. just. as poor as the 40 children down in Upton. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Mr. FORD. Mr. Chairman, may I ask a question about five before he goes on? Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Mr. Foun. You said in the second sentence of the fifth recommenda- t.ion that community action requirements conflict with the Kentucky State law which provides the superintendent of schools must recom- mend all personnel. Are you talking about Headstart there? Mr. Buiurn~u. Yes, sir; Headstart. And under the OEO pro- gram, it is the same. Mr. Fonn. If we made Headstart a.n educational program as dis- tinguished from the community act.ion program, would the Kentucky law require that all t.he personnel approved by the public school agency could be employed in the program? Mr. BURKHEAD. That is right. Mr. Foim. Would that, t.hen, under Kentucky law, prohibit, a pa~ rochial school t.eache.r from teaching in Headstart? Mr. BURKHEAD. I believe it would, but. I am not sure. I think it would; yes. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Mr. BURKHEAD. No. 6. In my school district, a.nd in Kentucky as a whole, there is a. serious shortage of classrooms. The money re- ceive.d cannot be spent as wisely-I am talking about money received under title I-or as effectively, since there is no space in which to house the children for special classes. In some instances, makeshift rooms or subst.andard rooms are being used; however, there are. very, very few of these available. The lack of classrooms is probably the greatest handicap for school officials in carrying out. an effective program under ESEA. Construction money should either be made available under t.he act or a new construction act passed. PAGENO="0134" 956 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS This lack of space has prevented school systems from making the most efficient use of funds aiid has led in some instances to the spend- ing of money for programs which do the least good. The pressure to spend the money has led to impractical and unnecessary programs in some instances. Such money could have been spent wisely had there been available space in which to set up special classes for the mentally handicapped, special remedial programs, and enrichment programs. For instance, we have one class for educable children (IQ's 50 to 80) in our system; with space available, there could have been 10 or 12 of these very much needed units. 7. Local school districts should be allowed funds for administering title II of the act. 8. It is my understanding that title V of ESEA may be amended to include a section B which would permit the Governors of the States to set up a special agency to plan for education. Far too much politics already exists in school management and planning; this will invite and encourage even more. This type of planning could best be done through the already existing Department of Educatioii, where ma- chinery and trained personnel are available for that purpose. It would appear that the suggested $15 million annually for 5 years is an exorbitant amount for this program. 9. Headstart is the best program in all of the categorical aid pro- grams. It should not be tampered with by community action com- mittees who are neither trained nor qualified to recommend employees to superintendents of schools. To demand or require the superin- tendent to choose employees from their recommendations is inviting weakness and discord in the program. 10. It is the belief of school administrators in Kentucky that the U.S. Office of Education should be the sole agency for the administra- tion of education legislation. At the annual midwinter meeting of the Kentucky Association of School Administrators, the following was one of the resolutions passed by the group. Federal Aid to Education-This association recognizes and supports the growing National interest in education as exemplified by the Congress of the United States in its passage of the National Defense Education Act of 1958, the Vocational Education Act of 1963, the Elementary and Secondary Educa- tion Act of 1965, and many other laws which provide for national support of education. We are concerned, however, with the wide proliferation of respons- ibility for administration of these laws among so many different agencies of the Federal Government. The United States Office of Education should be designated by the Congress as the sole agency for the administration and implementation of all laws affecting education. All such laws should clearly state that the U.S. Office of Education shall administer such programs, below college and university level, through the various state departments of education in accordance with State Plans which clearly provide that the intent of Congress shall be com- pletely fulfilled. The Congress of the United States should not tolerate guide lines for State Plans which promulgate the bias and theories of individuals or agencies which go beyond the laws enacted. 11. The stigu'ested plan to use cue-half of the national average of per pupil expenditures for education as a new base for distributing funds nuder title I is ~ound. This would enable the purpose of the act to be carried out in the education of the disadvantaged child rather than merely dividiui~ the funds. PAGENO="0135" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 957 The observations and criticisms presented above do not mean that. the law has failed to accomplish at least a part of its intended pur- Poses. Certainly, the aid received has had a tremendous effect for good in our local educational program and, I am sure, this same good has been effected throughout our State and Nation. I believe that these criticisms represent the general thinking of many supermtend- ents over the State and Nation. It is hoped that careful considera- tion will be given to these suggestions and that, with changes m the law, even greater achievements could be made in our school programs for the disadvantaged and economically deprived children. PUBLIC LAWS 874 AND 815 (Trri~ I OF THE 1965 ESEA ACT) I would now like to discuss Public Laws 874 and 815 as they now relate to Kentucky. Since the beginning of World War II, children of both military and civilian personnel from the Fort Knox Military Reservation have each succeeding year placed a greater burden on the schools of Hardin County and other adjacent districts. This is also true in the Fort Campbell area. Approximately 110,000 acres of land have been removed from the tax rolls in order to increase the acreage of the Fort Knox Reservation. Hardin County is for the most part a rural county. In more than half of the counties of Kentucky, there has been a loss in population since World War II. In Hardin County, the school population has doubled. With this pupil increase, there has not been a correspond- ing increase in economic growth. There has been less than a 10- percent growth in financial support of schools at the local level (1965 Statistical Report, State Department of Education). There are now enrolled in the Hardin County schools a total of 7,220 students. Of this number. 2.755 are impact students. The previous year, t.here were 2,450 impact students. This is an increase of 305 impact students this year. With the present increase in activities on Fort Knox, a helicopter school, and a $16 million building program, the number of impact students will probably increase to 1.000 additional over last year before the end of the fiscal year. Our school financing, even with t.he increased aid from Public Laws 874 and 815, has caused tight budgeting, budgeting so tight as to be dangerous. Financial dif- ficulties increase month by month. School districts in the area of Fort Knox and Fort Campbell are facing financial disaster and in some cases bankruptcy because of the crippling amendment slipped into the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. Mr. For~. What amendment do you have reference to there? Mr. BURKHEAD. I am referring to the. amendment that. in any Fed- eral installation where the State does not. contribute to education of the children in the dependent schools that property will no longer be considered eligible for funds under Public Law 874. Mr. Foiw. Is that an amendment- Chairman PERKINS. You will note it is on gage 7 of the statement. Mr. BURKHEAD. The following new provisions were added by the amendment to section 10 of Public Law 815 and by section 229 of Pub- Tic Law 89-750. PAGENO="0136" 958 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS If no tax revenues of a State or of any political subdivision of the State may by expended for the free public education of children who reside on any Federal property within the State, or if no tax revenues of a State are allocated for the free public education of such children, then the property on which such children reside shall not be considered Federal property for the purposes of Section 5 of this Act. Section 204 added the following new provision to section 6 of title I, Public Law 874: (f) If no tax revenues of a State or of any political subdivision of the State may be expended for the free public education of children who reside on any Fed- eral property within the State, or if no tax revenues of a State are allocated for the free public education of such children, then the property on which such children reside shall not be considered Federal property for the purposes of sec- tions 3 and 4 of this act. If a local educational agency refuses for any other reason to provide in any fiscal year free public education for children who reside on Federal property which is within the school district of that agency or which, in the determination of the Commissioner. would be within that school district if it were not Federal property. there shall be deducted from any amount to which the local educational agency is otherwise entitled for that year under section 3 or 4 an amount equal to (1) the amount (if any) by which the cost to the Corn- missioner of providing free public education for that year for each such child exceeds the local contribution rate of that agency for that year, multiplied by (2) the number of such children. Boards of education and school districts affected in Kentucky are helpless within themselves in complying with these amendments. At- torneys general in Kentucky have ruled repeatedly that Kentucky law forbids the State and local school districts from spending tax dollars in the operation of schools on Federal property since the property is not considered a part of the State of Kentucky. During the past 16 years, numerous appeals have been made to the attorneys general of Kentucky for a reversal of this ruling. The present attorney general is studying the problem. The chance, however, for a favorable ruling on the matter is very slim. Without a favorable ruling from the attorney general's office, we in Kentucky have but one alternative. The State legislature will meet a few months before the amendments go into effect. An effort must be made to get legislation passed which would allow school districts to operate schools on Federal property. This legislation, which would save only a few districts from financial ruin, would be extremely diffi- cult to pass. here is the problem in getting enal)ling State legislation. Kentucky is a l)aulP~~~ State. Greater demands for additional school funds are made each succeeding meeting of the legislature. The legislature in the past 10 years has been rather generous with the schools despite limited State resources. A sales tax was passed; additional enabling legislation was passed in order to allow districts to increase funds at the local level. With all of this, Kentucky still ranks 44th in the Nation with its schools. To ask the State legislature to appropriate $2 million in extra school funds to provide for 10,000 children thrust on them suddenly by Federal legislation seems unfair and unjust. There are a great many arguments against such legislation and very few to support it. For example, this $2 million cost to the State would give each teacher in the. Commonwealth a.n $80 raise in salary, and Kentucky ranks 44th PAGENO="0137" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 959 in this category in the Nation. There is just no good argument for getting such legislation passed. What will happen to my school district of Hardin County with its 7,220 schoolchildren if this amendment remains a part of the impacted area legislation a.nd if the attorney general of Kentucky fails to give a favorable ruling and the State legislature fails to pass enabling legislation ? There are at. present 2,755 children eligible to receive aid from Public Law S74. tTnder the Armed Forces interpretation, in Hardin County, 1,147 of these children would qualify under the new law. This would mean that we would have to deduct $184,920 from the 1968 school budget. This would amount t.o a cut in salary of more than ~GO0 for each of our 300 teachers. Such a reduction in salary would not be allowed under the law, which sets a minimum salary which must. be paid. Even though the law allowed this, our teachers would not stay in the system and it would be impossible to hire others. Without staff, our schools would be ruined, and 7,220 children would suffer the consequences. 1,Ve have no alternatives. We are at the mercy of three forces: the attorney general of the State, the State legislature, and t.he Con- gress of the United States. One of these agencies must act or our school system will be wrecked. What is true in Hardin County will also be true of others in the poor Southland. Chairman PERKINS. Have you discussed this particula.r amend- ment with your impacted people throughout the country? Is this the only hardship that exists in Kentucky? As I recall, the people pretty well supported this amendment East year throughout t.he county, I could be wrong. Mr. BURKHEAD. It was in there, Mr. Perkins. Of course, there were about eight States affected, and they are the Southern States. Chairman PERKINS. Let me say to my good friend that this was discussed openly. We all knew the true import of it when we put it in here, except we felt like you would get a favorable ruling without difficulty. We could see no reason why the way the other States had applied. But be that as it may, we will try to render all justice here that is possible. Go ahead. Mr. BURKHEAD. I would like to explain furt.her the helplessness of my district in absorbing this loss in revenue. For the past 15 years, we have levied the maximum tax rate allowed under Kentucky laws. Our bonding capacity has been continually exhausted from building 224 new classrooms and in making other capital outlay investments. This fiscal year we were permitted a 10-percent increase in t.he tax rate; we were also allowed to levy a 3-percent tax on utility bills. This, the board did; they also agreed to levy an additional 10 percent for the next school year, which was also permitted by law. In spite of our having levied the maximum taxes under State law and in spite of our having issued all the bonds for const.ruction per- mitted under t.he law, we were forced to have 600 children on double sessions this past fall. The future becomes a calamity if this amend- ment, subsection 204 of section 6 of title I, goes into effect on June 30, 1968. PAGENO="0138" 960 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDME~S To save a great many school districts in this county from great in- jury, or in some cases bankruptcy, I suggest that this conimittee give its careful consideration to one of the following alternatives: 1. Delete the amendment from t.he 874 legislation. 2. To avoid great numbers of children from Federal properties thrust upon already overburdened States, exempt all Federal prop- erties with 2,000 or more children in their dependent schools. 3. Allow a longer period for adjustment-20 years, for example- deleting 5 percent each year until all the children can be absorbed by the local district. I want t.o express my appreciation to the members of the committee for having given me the opportunity to present these observations, probIems~ and facts covering the operation of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 and t.he present Federal aid to ed- ucation legislation now before this committee. Chairman PrnKIxs. Let. me. say, Mr. Burkheacl, as to the problem ou pointed out in connection with Federal aid. Your State board of education operating your school system, if I recall, this has been pretty uniform procedure through the years, where we had so many Federal installations operating schools at. t.he time., aiicl there are. very few of them today throughout the country. My memory may be dulled, but. our committee will see that von obtain justice. If it is necessary to make a change. I know that the committee will want to do the right thing. It will direct the staff to go into this problem and see if there are any other Federal installations in the country, other than Fort Knox. where the St.ates cannot, under the laws, presently operate their school system~ Mr. BFRKI1EAD. Mv board of educ.at.ion would be happy to merge the districts if it were possible unde.r the law, but we are helpless. We cant control the State legislature or t.he Attorney General. The State has the argument. that to provide $2 million in extra State revenues to educate. the children on Campbell and Knox, and a few districts get. only S800,1)00, that. is not very good trade. That. is not. horse trading in Kentucky. Yet some school districts will be ruined. Eliz- abet.htown, Meade County; Hardin County, West Point., Christian County: Montgomery County of Tennessee. Chairman Pnucixs. We will see that no school district, is destroyed by this amendment. Mr. BFRKHEAD. That makes me very happy. Chairman PERKINS. Let me say this. ~We will certainly do the best ioh we. can. hut. we. have done so much in the impact. areas and so little in the. general Federal-aid area. I came to your community one time in 1949 when you were teaching in an old NYA building. You have made so nuich progress under the impact area and I want von to con- tinue to make the came type of progress. Mr. Bi~i~TIE~D. You have kept us from being the poorest dist.rict in Kentucky from the Federal impact money. Chairman PERKINS. You have done a great. job down there. I want to compliment von for it. This amendment more or less puzzles me. Whe.n we were trying t.o work out. a uniform procedure last year, it did not. dawn on me that we were. contravening State law. We have it. all around us in all neighboring States that have taken a. diametri- PAGENO="0139" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDv'CATION AMENDMENTS 961 cally opposite approach. I thou~ht that Oscar Rose endorsed this approach. I may l)e wrong. Mr. BtrRKHEAD. I called Oscar. He had not even heard of it. Mr. FORD. Mr. (iiairnian,v on will recall in the hearings on the west. coast arid Hawaii there were places where school districts were almost totally dependent. on the Federal inipact. funds. In the State of Hawaii, if we pulled out Public Law 874 they would have to shut their schools. They don't. want. 874 pulled out. because one of the l)cillcil)al ~vavs to support schools out there is with the sales tax and sales tax collection hears a direct relation to the number of dependents that we station out there who spend money one way or another. But there ~s another p~'ob1em that collies U~. As I recall, we have ic~ or 19 States that take the Federal impact money and. liv one device or another, actually merge it. with general State aid so that the school district, that. has the Federal impact. children does not really iain much advantage. In the State of Washington. for example. if Vail receive a hundred thousand dollars under Public Law 815 when they divide, up your State aid the following year they deduct the S1oO,~a~ from the money von would otherwise get from the State. The. result that that. is ~1OO,OOO in the general pocket. distributed around the country. There was some. agitation in Congress. and there has been some his- tory of an attempt. to earmark the impact funds so that they would he spent, if not. on the individual dependent. child, at least only in the school t.hat he attended in proportion to his portion of the student body. This would have worked a hardship on a large number of districts. And I think Mr. Rose and his people, with this amendment. were concerned in trying to find a way to keep the. money with the school district that had the kid. When we put a military installation in Kentucky. in other words, we should attempt to keel) the money in an area that is absorhing the impact. Mr. BURKI-TEAD. This is not ruining Kentucky. It is not deducted from our entitlement under the foundation program. Mr. FORD. But you say that t.he Kentucky law says you can't use public funds to operate schools on Federal property? Mr. BTJRKHEAD. That. is right. ~\[1. FORD. Does that extend to a. child who lives on Federal property hut attends a public school adjacent. t.o Federal property? Mr. BURKTIEAD. The children living on the Federal property den't attend public, schools off the base. The schools are all on the bases. No child living off the base is permitted to go to school on the base. Mr. FORD. I can't get the picture. of what. we are talking about here. Xre von talking about only those schools operated liv the puhhie school system, even though they are in the Military Establishment Mr. BURIcT-TE~D. No, sir: it is a. dependent school operated by the IT.S. Office of Education. Chairman PERKINS. It is one of the few operated by the Office of Education on Fort Knox property? Mr. BURKTTE~\D. That is right.. ~\[r. FORD. ITow do these children who are attending that school place a burden an your school district.? Mi'. BFRKHK\D. We have 5.7~3 children living off base that. are Federal. connected. Those are the children I am talking about. PAGENO="0140" 962 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDtCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. FORD. They live off base and go to school on base'? Mr. Buni~iIE~D. No. sir. They go to the public schooTs off base. Mr. FORD. This amendment. prevents you from receiving aid for those children? Mr. Br-T~KTTE.~D. Except for the Armed Forces children: under the lnterpretation of the law at present. they say we can receive 874 funds for eliildre.n of soldiers, but not for other personnel working on base. Mr. FORD. We liberalized that. in 1966. Mr. BU-RKTIEAD. Yes, that is the liberalization. But we would be happy to operate the schools on the post, but we can't. All we need is an Attorney General's opinion, and it does not look like we are going to get it. Mr. FORD. But YOU are receiving the 874 funds for the children who are Iivin~ off the base and attending public schools? Mr. BrniKIIEAD. Yes, sir. Our entitlement this year is $317,000 out of a S2 million budget. Mr. FORD. What~ portion of the total support for your schools comes from the State and local resources? What is the percentage ~ Mr. BUTiKHEAD. About. 2~ percent. ~rr. FORD. Local or State? Mr. BURKHEAD. Local. Mr. T~OR[). You get 75 percent of support from your State? Mr. BURKHEAD. State and Federal. Mr. FORD. You said in your statement earlier that in 1960 you have not receive any construction money from the State? Mr. Brn~KTTE~D. Any additional construction money from the State; that is ri&it. Mr. F~RD. But does the 75 percent aid you have, include, construction money as well? Mr. BrTRKTTEAD. Yes, sir. Mr. FORD. Where does the State get the money? Mr. BITTiKHEAD. Sales tax and general fund. Mr. FORD. Does it earmark? Mr. Bt~KiTEAD. No. sir; it is not earmarked. We get about 1 per- cent of the 3 percent sales tax for school purposes. Mr. FORD. One percent of the sales tax revenue, or one-third of the sales tax revenue? ~ r~. Bt-RKTTF.\D. About one-third. Mr. FORD. When they put a. $16 million building Program into just one military installation in Kentucky it has to kick a lot of dollars around in the sales tax collection. Don't they see that. down in your State capital? Mr. BURKITFAD. No sales tax applies on the reservation. Mi'. FORD. But. there are a lot, of people drawing paychecks? Mr. Br'RKHEAD. We can't. tax those checks. If we could, we would be the richest county in the area. We have the largest per capita income in the State of any county, according to the 1960 census. Mr. FORD. You have the. highest per capita income and the poorest school district? Mr. BURKnE%n. I didn't say we had the poorest. I said we would have had the poorest system if it. had not been for 874. Mr. FORD. I meant poorest. dist.rict in terms of income. PAGENO="0141" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 963 Chairman PERKINS. Is Congressman Stubblefield here? He was sitting here a moment ago. Go ahead, Marvin. Mr. DODSON. The next witness, Mr. Chairman, is Mr. Frank Vitte- tow, of the. department of education in Kentucky. STATEMENT OF FRANK VITTETOW, ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT, BUREAU OF STATE FEDERAL RELATIONS, DEPARTMEIIT OF EDU- CATION, FRANXFORT, KY. Mr. \ITTET0w. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am Frank IH. Vit.tetow, assistant superintendent of Public Instruction for State and Federal Relations, Department of Education, Com- monwealth of Kentucky. On behalf of Dr. Harry Sparks, superintendent of public instruc~ t.ion and the department, of educations may I express my appreciation to the members of the Committee on Education and Labor for the privilege of appearing before you. Too, may I thank this clistin- guished body for the courtesies that have been extended to t.he depart- ment of education and to the public school districts of the Common- wealth of Kentucky. Mu(h of time present strength of the limed states has come from a diversified and free. public school system. The desires on the part. of the loal school (listrict to dare to be. diftereimt to follow the dic- tates of its own educational insights, as well as to perpetuate the, mores of the communit.y of which it. is a part-is bedrock to the (lemnocratie tradition. The dedication of local school administrators and teachers amid stalls to provide an adequate. system of education for the Nation's children cannot. be measured in dollars or formal measuring devices. The measure of such dedication at all levels of the school structure in the future will continue to be determined by such factors as morale, free- dom of choice, and participation in decisions that are rightfully theirs by tradition and proven service to the Nation. It has been stated on numerous occasions that. America may be in a period of transition. If t.his be true, we should pause, reflect., and examine very carefully the process of transition. It. is sometimes rec- ognized that. a process, in itself, is often more important. than the end result. which is being sought. It is in this context that the speaker would like to respectfully review some of the concerns of Federal aid to education and offer some recommendations on behalf of the. depart- ment. of education relative to the proposed H.R. 6230. The process of administering, and the evolving philosophy on the part of the U.S. Office of Education, seems t.o be developing a general tendency t.o draw more and more attention away from the desire.d end result. of providing well qualified teachers in a well built. and ade- quately equipped classroom for 25 to 30 well nourished and highly motivated children in an increasingly complicated society. To assist. in the. elimination of some of the basic frustration amid general concern of school officials in Kentucky relative, to certain aspects of Federal aid to education, the following types of general i'econ imendations are respectfully offered PAGENO="0142" 964 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1. The timing of Federal authorizations, appropriations, regula- tions, and allocations is not conducive to encouraging logical and methodical planning on the part of local and State school officials. ni he effectiveness of Federal aid to education could become more pro- nounceci if congressional authorization patterns and school years could become more compatible. Chairman PERKINS. I~t. me state at this point that I am most hope- ful that after the debate on this bill this year and the debate on the education appropriation bill which may come in mid-April that we can eliminate this problem once and for all, so that you can plan in a timely and orderly manner. I know you are frustrated by the way we have been coming along with slow authorizations and then slow appropriations, and everybody hardly knows in which direction to turn. It just does not provide such action on their part, good administration at the local level. We are going to do our best to eliminate that. Mr. \Iri'ETow. TI iank von. Mr. Cha irni an. 2. The bulk of Federal funds for education should come to the States under a minimum foundation type of an approach that is based on an objective formula which would consider the financial ability of a State to support education. 3. All of the Federal funds coming into a State for preschool, ele- inentarv, and secondary education should be routed through the de- partnients of education. There should be no exception to this approach. 4. The basic planning by the U.S. Office of Education should be done with departrnent~ of education early enough in a fiscal year so as to i~ssure enough leadtime for budget reviews and implementation proce- dures on the part of local school districts. 5. Serious consideration should be given to the development of an aid-to-construction bill for public elementary and secondary schools. A formula, including provisions for need versus local school districts' building bonding potential and usage, should be considered. 6. General opposition is given to the regionalization concept of the U.S. Office of Education. It is felt that such an approach simply constitutes another layer of regulatory control over the educational structure of the States. Existing or proposed offices could better serve the cause of education in the realms of planning and consulta- tive services to State departments of education in a region. 7. Federal ~riiicielines and regulations relating to education should i)C (leVelOl)ed throiurh more cooperative procedures with the States. Currently, there i-a general tendency for State personnel to be 1)rolight into the ioees-s after basic guideline direction has been est.ab- li~lied by t.he U.S. Office of Education. At this point the States are advised of basic intent, or clarifications made of already written guidelines andlor regulations. Specific concerns, support, and/or recommendations relating to H.R. (~3() may he grouped in the following manner: T;f7e 1. ESEJ.-Fuill support and appreciation is given to two men(lments whi~h are extremely beneficial to the Commonwealth of Kentucky: 1. The revised "Federal percentage" factor wiuch will be used to determine maximum grants during fiscal year 1968 based on the aver- PAGENO="0143" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 965 age per pupil expenditures in a State or the United States will help to correct the inequity for distribution of title I funds that was con- tained in the original legislation. 2. The new low-income factor of $3,000 rather than the. previous $2,000 offers opportunities to more of Kentucky and the Nat.ions youth. It would be further hoped that title I could be fully financed to the October 1966 authorization level of the 89th Congress. Excessive paperwork requirements.-One matter of concern reltes to the excessive "paperwork" requirements relating to title I, as well as other titles of all acts. It. would seem that there should be some commonality in and between the data required by the U.S. Office of Education from State departments of education and local school dis- tricts. Baseline data from one title application to another could possibly be referred to in applications, or reports, as they are offered to the U.S. Office of Education for consideration. Title II, EAS~EJ.-Because of this support. we are grateful, and at this time we have no basic recommendations to offer to the committee. Title III, ESEJ.-Amendments need to be made in title III, ESEA, which will provide that local project applications and proposals for supplementary centers shall be initially routed through, and be sub- ject to final approval by, the State departments of education under provisions of State plans. Probably 10 to 15 percent of Federal funds available should be set aside for projects to be approved by the U.S. office of Education. Mr. FORD. Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Let me ask you, though, have you ever had any trouble with the Office of Education, any difficulty in their going contrary to the wishes of the State department in Frankfort in approving a load project supplemental education center over and beyond your reeonimenda- tions. or have they foTlowed your suggestions and cooperated with you Mr. VIrrETow. On one or two occasions, sir. We ha.ve a rec.ord of that, yes. Chairman PERKINS. Where have they approved projects down there not recommended by the State department? Mr. VITTETOW. They have not overridden us, but those that we have recommended that they would not recommend. Mr. Fom. I notice. that you nassed over title. TI with a very short, sentence saying "WTe. love it." But the man nsf. ahead of you pointed out that they have a problem at the local level of administering title TI because they are not, getting any of the administrative set-aside that wa.s put into this title. We have heard this from ot.her States as well. Is it. true that. in Kentucky the percentage allowance for administra- tion of title IT is held at the St.ate level and they do not pass any of this along to the local districts administering the program? Mr. VrrrETow. We pass some: yes, sir. We were trying to c.om pare this in concert with the other types of problems that we were having. We do not feel, sir, that this was a major concern. Naturally, we would like to have more moneys for administration of all of our funds, but. to me we did not feel that it was a major concern. PAGENO="0144" 966 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. FORD. 1-low do you break down the percentage? Chairman PERKINS. I think we spelled it out last year. Mr. FORD. Last year, I though we made it clear we intended it to be divided equitably between the State and local units. What formula do you have for dividing it? Do you have a percentage, or how do you do it? Mr. VrrrETOW. I apologize for not having the detailed information on the percentage. but we do pass to the local districts that portion which is given to us. sir. i\lr. FORD. Is thei~e anybody in the panel that later will tell us what is being passed on from the State to the local? Mr. T)onsox. We have one here. Mr. FORD. All right. I will withhold my question until later. Chairman PER1~ixs. Go ahead. Mr. VIrTETOW. Title IlL NDF~A: The department of education strongly recommends that restoration of the proposed cut in NDEA, title III. funds which are earmarked for title V. ESEA. It. is further l1oI)edl that the fiscal year 1968 appropriation bill be no less than the fiscal year 1967 funding level of S79 million. The proposed extension of the National Defense Education Act is fully supported. Title V. ESEA: There is an understandable need for continuous planning and evaluation at~ all levels of education. Such planning~ of necessity, must come from within the school structure with the assist- ance of a(lvisory groups from all levels of society. The new proposal. part B of title V, relating to "Grants for com- prehensive educational planning and evaluation" does not meet the avowed needs of State departments of education. The proposal is for- ei~n to basic pre~ept5 which relate to close planning and operational relationships. Part A of the same title has a built-in planning and evaluative process. As an aside to the issue, the ~l5 million request is exorbitant if con- tempi ate(l lust for pl almlng 1)llrposes. This proposed financing would probably have more far-reaching effect in developing better educa- tional programs in departments of education if it were added to part A. same title, with a requirement that a portion be utilized specifically for additional planning and evaluative elements. There are~ also concerns relating to part A of title V. It is under- stood that a support figure of S29.750.000 is proposed. This budgetary supPort figure and the general 40 /60 percent distribution formula will benefit Kentucky's Department of Education. Fnder the above distribution formula some. consideration should be given to an equalization concept which would take into account the relative wealth of the States. The "borrowmg' from established NDEA titles to produce. the ~29,~i50.000 proposed for title V. ESEA is our fundamental concern. It is understood the funding compilation is as follows: Bn~ic apuropriation request~ title V ~22. 000. 000 Deduct from XDEA. TIl ~ 500. Oft) Deduct fr~n NT)EX. X 2, 250, 000 Frem the above. 15 percent i~ withheld for "special projects" by the (`emnhissioner of Education. This, coupled with the proposed 25 per- cut "~p~cial T~ut~" withholding element of tIle proposed part B. PAGENO="0145" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDtCATION AMENDMENTS 967 title V. would seem to continue to defeat the basic tenets a-f goo(l planning in the State departments of educatioii. This would mean that nearly 20 percent of the proposed ~44,750,001) under parts A and B of title V could be utilized by the U.S. Office of Education for direct planning and evaluative projects relating to departments of education. The Kentucky Department of Education is OppOse(l to such con- cepts as are. offered. Restoration of funds to titles TTT and X, NDEA are strongly urged. Title V-A. NDEA.-Tt is recommended that YDEA. title V-A be fully financed to the authorized appropriation level of ~3C) million beginning fiscal year 1968. It would he further hoped that an in- creasing appropriation, during the next 5 years. would be in evidence providing for the development of pupil personnel services. Title T7I. ESEA.-Tt is urged that full support be. given to all amendments proposed in this title which relate to education of the handicapped child. The regional resource centers concept. can serve the needs of Kentucky and the Nation to a great advantage. It is hoped that title VI can be fully financed at the S51) million (fiscal year 1967) and $150 million (fiscal year 1968) levels as author- ized by the 89th Congress. National Teacher Corps.-Tt is recommended that the National Teacher Corps Act be continued as a pilot program for a period of 3 years. Funds allocated for such a program as well as the approval pattern for Corps members should come. through departments of education. The "local control" section should be amended so that no Teacher Corps member could be assigned to a local educational agency unless the local agency finds the teachers to be acceptable. Support is given to the idea of transfer of Teacher Corps from Higher Education Act to title I, ESEA. Other Concerns of a General Nature: 1. The Headstart program should be transferred from the Office of Economic Opportunity to t.he U.S. Office of Education. All basic elements of the program, featuring parent education and participa- tion, should he retained. 2. Support is sought for the passage of Senate bill 3, of 1967 which provides effective enforcement procedures of the free-exercise. clauses of the first. amendment. of the Constitution. 3. The Child Nutrition Act should be. fully funded. Portions of the allocation should be. reserved for the purposes of State. administra- tion of t.he act. 4. That portion of the Fair Labor Standards Act. of 1938 a.s amended to cover public, schools should he repealed. There. are. indications t.hat subsidized programs such as the school lunch services, now more or less on a. bre.akeven l)asis will have to raise. lunch prices to meet re- qiiirements of the act., secure additional foodstuff aP(l/or secure. addi- tional appropriations to meet. financial requirements of the act. 5. The Adult Education Act of 1966 should have a supplemental appropriation in order to provide. the maximum level authorized for fiscal year l9~7 and fiscal year 196$. The minimum age of eligibility should be 16 years. The. term `~aclult. basic education" should he con- sistently detineci at all places ni the act. 75-492---67-pt. 2-1O PAGENO="0146" 968 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Again, may I express my most sincere appreciation for the honor of having appeared before this distinguished body. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much for your statement this morning. Go ahead, Dr. Dodson. Mr. DODSON. The. next. witness, Mr. Cliairniaii, will be Sam V. Noe, superintendent of the Louisville City Schools. Chairman PERKINS. Come around, Dr. Noe. WTe are glad to have you here again. STATEMENT OF SAMUEL V. NOE, SUPERINTEND~ENT, LOUISVILLE INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS, LOUISVILLE, KY. Mr. N0E. Mr. Chairman, distinguished members of this cormnittee, I, too, am very grateful for this opportunity to appear before you and to offer testimony in behalf of the amendments to H.R. 6230 which are before you. Let me say, also, that we in the metropolitan area also have this same fine appreciation for the leadership of your chair- man that Mr. Dodson expressed on behalf of Kentuckians and all sections of the state. When Carl Perkins Day was held up in eastern Kentucky we were very happy to have a delegation from Louisville to join with our friends in eastern Kentucky in honoring the person whom we have come to love as a very distinguished Kentuckian. So, on behalf of 53,000 public school children and 4,500 employees in t.he Louisville school system, I want to express our very great apprecia- tion to you and through you to the Congress for all the Federal assist- ance that we have been receiving. Because of this, we have been able to expand and initiate programs which would not have been possible otherwise. Through Federal grants, this year amounting to $4,337,- 614, we feel that we have accepted a great responsibility for its proper use. To the best of our knowledge, all our programs are good, all have been helpful in giving added educational opportunities to thou- sands of handicapped youth. We were exceedingly pleased, and we offer as an exhibit to you the paper which we have submitted to you that in our Courier Journal on Friday there is this headline "Federal Team Checks School Program. Use of Funds for Disadvantaged Children Praised." This came from a three-man team from t.he National Advisory Council for Education of Disadvantaged Children, who spent 2 days in our city looking at our programs. I think you would expect me to say that as a result of our experience that none of these programs should be discontinued. The financial cuts which we received this year, we think, should be restored, and, also, 1 think you would expect a city superintendent to say that we need more. We would add the endorsement to the statement that was made, and we were delighted to hear, Mr. Chairman, your statement about this, that appropriations should match authorizations and that they should be made with as much consideration as possible t.o the schools' fiscal year. Now, in regard to my comments about the National Teacher Corps, I would say that. our system. like T am sure many urban systems, has PAGENO="0147" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 969 been affected by this major problem which the National Teacher Corps has been designed to solve. That is, the recruiting and holding of well-qualified and adequately trained teachers for inner city schools. During the school ye.ar, two National Teacher Corps teams are work- ing with us. The team leaders and the internes have already demon- strated their value to the schools. It is obvious that the competence of the internes will continue to develop so that a.t the end of their training they will be excellent teachers (le.dicat~d to working in im- poverished areas. We believe that the National Teacher Corps is meeting a longfelt need and we, of course, would like to see the program continued wit.h increased emphasis. Apparently the proposed amendment which you people are considering by making the NTC a part of title I does have hope of improving the budgetary arrangement, and we feel that it is an amendment which should be favorably considered. Under the comprehensive educational planning, it is our l)ehef that title V amended as a 5-year program, I suggest, will be highly bene- ficial. In our judgment, a strong State department of education will help individual schools through additional and more effective services. Long-range planning, research projects, and evaluation procedures at the State and local levels will ben~efit all school systems. For example, ways of examining and evaluating textbooks, prepar- ing curriculum guides, selecting audiovisual materials, and improving ways of pupil accounting might be studied and the results made avail- able statewide. I might say in passing it does not seem to me in this electronic age that we have 30,000 schoolteachers in Kentucky and every school- teacher every morning and every afternoon is a bookkeeper, and one who spends much time at the end of each month in pupil accounting, when it could be done in a much simpler fashion. In order to avoid further involvement with the various existing agencies and with a possible additional State agency, I would recom- mend that all projects to be authorized under this proposed amend- ment be channeled through the State department of education. This would not mean that we would not want the involvement of citizens groups with the Government. We feel that all of these relationships would be fine. But. in the final analysis we feel that such proposals going through the State department of education, w-ith whom we work, would be to our advantage. Then, when we look at the Vocational Act of 1963, we are very grateful to a concerned Congress which has done so much to help and to improve the image of vocational education. The proposed amend- ment as we understand it would make possible more extensive and intensive programs to meet manpower needs. Exp]oratory, work experience, and counseling programs will assist students in pursuing their objective. This shift in the structure of the labor market will place youths with lesser abilities at a greater disadvantage. Since many youths become dropouts because of academic requirements, more programs in which students can acquire skills in basic tool operations and processes are needed. Continuing financial help supporting the occupation a], informa- tional and skill programs must be forthcoming, if both the quantity PAGENO="0148" 970 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS and quality of the manpower needs are to be met. Curriculum changes and updating are needed. Expensive equipment in electricity and electronics should be made available for training purposes. Then we have a real problem in additional training and in-service sessions for instructors of vocational programs. Then, when we look at your pro- posal on expanded educational opportunities for handicapped children we say that educational opportunities for handicapped children in our school district have been provided since 1911. Proposals contained in 1I.R. 6230 t.o strengthen title VI by adding regional resource~ centers would provide t.esting and evaluation services to determine the special education needs of handicapped children and to develop educational programs to meet these needs. I am also submitting-and I shall not~ read it-as an exhibit, just a report on a diagnostic center which we have established under title III funds. That is. we and Mr. Vanhoose in Jefferson County and the superintendents in Fullerton and Oldham Counties, in which we have established a center for diagnostic~ purpose.s for atypical children. It just starte(l this year. We foresee real promise for it. We think that~ the results to date are exceedingly fine. This t.ype of thing, this type of program which is proposed here for handicapped children we feel could be exceptionally useful to us and to all the school people throughout the country. Now if I might go back to the question which the Honorable Mr. Ford asked a moment a~o about title II. To my knowledge, we do not receive any money for the administration of the title II program. Now if we have a quarrel with our State department of education, then we will look at that when we get home. But we do receive some money, to my knowledge, for processing books and those things. But for the administration of the program as it pertains to our friends in the parochial school, I don't think we are getting any administrative money for that~. I think that is out of our own local budget. Mr. FORD. Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINs. Go ahead, Mr. Ford. Mr. FORD. I would like to call your attention to the house Report No. 1814 of the 89th Congress on H.R. 13161 which became t.he 1966 Amendments to the Elementary and Secondary Educational Act. On page 18 we say under title of ~`Adrninistration :" In the original Act we authorized not to exceed 5 per cent of the amount paid to the state under Title II be used in administering the state plan. The per- centage was to be reduced to 3 per cent in subsequent years of the program. That was the administration recommendation last year, that we go hack to 3 percent. This committee-and I will paraphrase the balance of it because we used a whole page to explain exactly what we had in mind-determined to leave the amount at 5 percent and not reduce it to 3 percent as was suggested. Then we said: Accnrdingly amendments have been adopted to require that state plans for carrying out the provisions of this title will provide for making available appro- priate portions of the 5 per cent administrative funds to the local public agencies actually distributing and exercising control and supervision over the use of the books and materials furnished. I thought that the are supposed to share that pay with you. Mr. NOr. M colleague here from Kentucky, Mr. Ford, has another Opinion about this. PAGENO="0149" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 971 Chairman PERKINS. There is no doubt in my judgment that the reg- ulations will provide that. you are entitled to receive that. Mr. NOE. Then there was a quest ion, again raised by Mr. Ford, about the final authority for employment, and were we running into any particular problem there. There was a guideline which our local OEO Office had which indi- cated that we were limited in our employment to people who were to be approved by the local committe.e of OFO. We. pointed out. to them in another action that was I)eing done by a superintendent of public instruction what was sai(l earlier, under Kentucky law the board of education does have final authority for all employment. I think this has been resolved satisfactorily by correspondence which SUi(l that you have to listen to recommendations from these local committees l)Ut are not bound by those recommendations, and that the final authority did remain with the board of education. In Kentucky, the superintendent makes the nominations for all employment. So, we feel that this has been worked out satisfactorily for us. We were happy t.o listen to recommendations and commendations from individuals and commit- tees, but we do not feel that our hands have been tied by this. One other question, Who can teach in a Headstart program? Were we limited to people? Again, T do not think so. We see nothing in Kentucky law or in the Federal guidelines that would keep us from employment of a nun or a hrother or a priest in a program in time OEO or Ileaclsi-art proarain. As a matter of fact, in Louisville. at the pres- ent time the coordinator of the Headstart program, working through the local office and working with all of us in the public school system, is a sister from one of the orders. To us this, again, is not a. limiting factor. Thank you so much for this opportunity to speak to you. (Mr. Noe's complete formal statement follows:) STATEMENT BY SAMUEL V. NoR, SUPERINTENDENT OF ScHooIs. Louisvir~, Ky. I am Samuel V. Noe, Superintendent of Schools in Louisville. Kentucky, and on behalf of some 53,000 public school children and 4,~00 employees, I want to express through you to the Congress our deep appreciation for all of the Fed- eral assistance we have been receiving. Because of this, we have been able to expand and initiate programs which would not have been possible otherwise. Through Federal grants amounting to $4,3.37.t314.0O for expenditure on pro- grams this school year, we have accepted a great responsibility for its proper use. To the best of our knowledge all are good, and all have been helpful in giving added educational opportunities to thousands of handicapped youth. None should he discontinued: the financial cuts of this year should be restored, and you would expect a city school administrator to add that we need more. I would also add our endorsement to the requests you have received that ap- propriations should match authorization and that they he made with as much consideration as possible to the schools' fiscal year in order that better plan- ning and staffing can he made. Concerning the proposed amendments to HR. 0230: 1 should like to comment as follows: NATr0NAL TEACHER CORPS The Louisville Public School system for several years has been affected by the major problem that the National Teacher Corps has been designed to help solve: th~t is. the recruiting and holding of well-qualified and adequately trained teachers for inner-city schools. During this school year. 19~-19B7. two NPC teams are working in two Louisville elementary schools. The two team leaders and the nine interns have already demonstrated their value to the schools. It is obvious that the compe- PAGENO="0150" 972 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMEW~S tence of the interns will continue to develop so that at the end of their training they will be excellent teachers dedicated to working in impoverished areas. We believe that the NTC is meeting a long-felt need, and we would like to continue the program with increased participation. Apparently the proposed amendment would ease the local educational agency's administrative problems by making the NTC a part of Title I and by improving the budgetary arrangement. COMPREHENSIVE EDUCATIONAL PLANNING it is cur belIef that Title V. anieiided as a five-year program, will be highly beneficial. A strung State I)epartment of Education will help individual schools through additional and mere effective services. Long range planning research projects and evaluatiun procedures at the state and local levels will benefit all school systei~is. For example, ways of examining and evaluating textbooks. preparing curriculum guides. selecting audio-visual materials, and improving w-ays of pupil accunting might he studied and the results made available s tatewi (Ic. In order t( avoid further involvement with the various existing agencies and with a pos~ihle additional state agency, I would recommend that all projects to be authorized under Section B. Title V. of the proposed amendments be channeled through the State Department of Education. Federal a~si~tnce la~ already made an impact on services from the State Department. Extension of these services as proposed in this amendment will further strengthen education throughout Kentucky. INNOVATION IN VOCATIONAL EDUCATION Modern equipment obtained through the Vocational Education Act of 1963 has enabled the Louisville Public Schools to improve, expand, and innovate programs in all areas of vocational education. A concerned Congress has done much to improve the image of vocational education. The proposed amendment would make possible more extensive and intensive programs to meet manpower need-c Exploratory, work experience, and coun- seling programs will assist student~ in pursuing their objective. The shift in the structure of the labor market will place youth with leser- abilities at a greater disadvantage unless programs can he provided to meet their needs. Since many youths become dropouts because of academic require- ments, more programs in w-hieh ~tudents can acquire skills in basic tool opera- tions and processes are needed. Continuing financial help supporting the occupational information and skills programs must he forthcoming if both the quantity and the quality of manpower needs are met. Curriculum changes and np-dating are needed. Expensive equipment in electricity and electronics should he made available to students for training purposes. Additional training and in-service sessions for instructors of vocational programs are necessary. EXPANDET) EDUCATION AL OPPORTUNITIES FOR HANDICAPPED CHII~DREN F.dueational oprortunitie~z for sonic of the handicapped children iii the Louis- ville Public School District have been provided since 1011. Although the state began providing additional support approximately thirty-five years later, many of the needs continue to he unmet. The proposals contained in HR. 6230 to strengthen Title VI by adding Regional Resource Centers w-ould provide testing and evaluation services to determine the special education needs of handicapped children and to develop educational pro~rams to meet these needs by assisting schools and other agencies: the pro- posal for Recruitment of Personnel would expand and encourage intensive nationwide recruitment programs: the proposal of Dissemination of Information on Education of the handicapped would encourage students to enter the pro- fession and give a new kind of support to the professional worker now in the field of handicapped children : the proposal for Expansin of Instructional Media Programs to Include All Handicapped Children would insure that all hand!- cn~led children w-ould receive benefits of instructional media materials as now being enjoyed by the deaf children through the Captioned Films Program. These additions to Title VI will give overall strength to the authorized programs and will undergird existing programs. PAGENO="0151" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 973 EXHIBIT A-FEDERAL EXPENDITURES 1965-66, 1966-67 Estimated amount of Federal funds received in 1965-68 and to be received by Louisville Board of Education: 1965-66 1966-67 Elementary and Secondary Education Act: Titlel $1,419,010 $1,307,000 Title II 103. ,49 104,838 Title III: StudentdramaticenrichmcnL 25.798 40,727 Education diagnostic-treatment center - - - - 227.985 Total l,54s.647 1,680,550 Economic Opportunity Act: Conimuoity-Schuol program (including preschool and adult education) 1.979, 27t 1.486.435 Ileadstart-Summer. -- 162,0130 144, 000 Neighborhood Youth corps 2l4.400~ 273. 000 Total 2,103,671 1,903,435 Public Law 874: Federal impacted areas 204, 994 National Defense Education Act: Title III (instruction) 198,241 86,886 Title V-A (guidance) 16,888 19, 779 Total 215.129 106,665 Vocational Education Act, 1963 69, 013 62,851 Lunch program: Plate lunches 150, 781 150, 781 Surplus foods 115,674 100, 000 Milk subsidy 128,338 128,338 Total 394, 793 379. 119 Grand total 4,391.253 4.337, 614 EXTIIIIIT B.-EvAI.UATION OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS Statements by principals. .snpcsi'isors, and teachers Field trips rated superior with the teachers us they had found that tise trips provided a background for the better understanding of concepts needed in learn- ing to reDd in all subject matter areas. Trips also provided eXlleriesites that promoted interest in language, (letter writing, stories, etc.) social studies. and matlseaiatics. All of the teachers gave high praise to the value of the teacher assistants. They felt the pupils gaisied assurance in their iaiprovecl self-image and in their ability to tackle academic tasks. The teachers expressed a fervent nope for the eniployment of additional teacher assistants for the upper grade teai'bers. The new- teachers spoke very highly of the hell) they received frcsa the resource teachers, who held ctsnferences, gave demonstrations. assisted with planning units. aided with room arrangement and classroom in anagesuen t, gti ided proldeni pllpils. and furnished appropriate materials for use ill tist' t'iassroosii. Teachers were also generous in their praise of the equipment which had been delivered. Numerous teachers commented. "At last I have the itiaterials necessary to really teach effectively." All teachers reported a great lift in their morale and a greater pupil interest in class work as a result elf purchases from Title I funds. Title 1 funds ssiade it possible for teachers to buy groceries and use government surplus i'isslsiiodities in snore appealing ways. Some prisicipals had been so iiat'lietl fur money that they had been unable to allot any money for groceries. All teaclors are en- thusiastic about the program, the additional equipment, supplies. and materials which will enable them to motivate and reach many of the culturally deprived children who would have otherwise continued to be culturally deprived and eventually become dropouts. Junior high librarians reported that the assignment of clerical aids has released the librarian from these time-consuming non-professional jobs. All junior high librarian reported that the librarian now has more tisne for careful selection of materials. PAGENO="0152" 974 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMET~S The addition of personnel to the elementary library resulted in increased interest arid enthusiasm on the part of the pupils. One major objective: to test the hearing of all children of the target area and identify children who should be recommended to an ear specialist. This objec- tive was accomplished as follows: There were a total of 13,524 given an initial screening test. Two thousand five hundred and forty-eight did not meet the standards of passing so they were given another test a week or two later. Of those tested the second time. many received a third test, and 466 w-ere recoin- mended to visit an ear specialist. Another objective was to administer vision screening tests and make recom- mendations to the parents of the children who did not meet the passing standards to take their child to an eye specialist. The resource teachers tested 1.254 pupils and recommendations were made for 147 of the pupils to visit an eye specialist. Another objective was to improve the dental health of as many children as possible. The Materials Center of the Board of Educatiun is extremely helpful in pre- paring the Curriculum Guide for the Special Education EMR pupils on the senior high level. It is now possible to secure useful materials on all grade levels and from so many different sources. namely; books, workbooks, pictures, posters. motion pictures. filmstrips, and many others. I ani sure that everyone attending the workshop, "Curriculum for the Edu- cationally Deprived" can honestly say that we benefitted from this opportunity. We appreciated the opportunity to attend a most interesting and well-plcuimed workshop. The speakers were excellent. Upward Bound students were delightful. TITLE II-E.5.E.A. Thank-s to Title II--E.S.E.A.. w-hich has furnished us .~1O4.S3S.OO worth of school library resources, textbooks, arid other instructional materials for use of children and teachers in 126 public and non-public schools of the district. The acquisition of these resources. together with library services provided by funds from Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. has improved and has enriched learninr experiences in the classroom. Replies to the question: "Name the most significant aspect of Title I project in your school. and tell as specifically as possible how it helped to pupils :" Field trips. Many children had never been out of their immediate neighborhoods. These trips widened their experiences and increased their vocabularies. The new counselor. This allow-ed an adult more time to work with children who had problems. The services provided by the addition of a guidance counselor supplies a long needed service to our overall school programs. The Reading Improvement teacher was most effective at Henry Clay School. Pupils made progress, got a different image of themselves and returned to show the teacher the change accomplished in their reading grade. Many students were happy. Teacher assistants to work with slow-learning pupils and free the teacher for instructional procedures. Resource teachers helped those teachers who are less progressive. The addition of a librarian and a clerk enabled the school to set up a central library and classes to make use of the library on a scheduled basis. The princi- pal and clerk- w-ere relieved of these duties. The opportunity of getting enough supplies and materials helped encourage the teacher. TIme children were overcome by such pretty pictures. hooks, games, etc. The additional equipment and supplies have been most stimulating to teachers and pupils in a school w-here we have had so little to work with. The resource teachers who helped the new teachers were most helpful. The teachers are already aware of the help children are receiving in the program for the per- ceptually handicapped. The classes of twenty have given better learning experiences to underachievers and allowed us to improve our pupil-teacher ratio. The offset press allowed us to have a school paper. Replies to the question: "If you add additional personnel, services, equipment. and/or supplies to your school with Title I funds, what would you want :" I PAGENO="0153" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 975 would like to have a Title I clerk, three Educable Mentally Retarded classes and one class of twenty. Wall screens for every classrooni and kindergarten storage cabinets for lower grade classrooms would add so much to the effectiveness of the program. Expand the allotments for field trips to include tickets for admissions to educational functions. The addition of clerical personnel, remedial reading teachers and assistants, a part-time coordinator of audio-visual, a helping teacher in music and art, and physical education personnel would help this program immensely. We could use more physical education equipment and more library books and periodicals. I would till the position of reading specialist. We need the addition of sets of supplementary books, metal cabinets, and first aid cabinets in each classroom. I would add niore space for mobile units. Our greatest need is the addition of more clerical personnel and a replacement of old clerical machines. For our lunchroom we need the servic'es of monitors. Our greatest need is for guidance personnel and clerks to help in making this added program more effective. I would buy with additional fund equipment and supplies for Art, Home Economics, and Industrial Arts. With extra funds I would make available the items suggested by teachers and make further altera- tions to building to accommodate classes of twenty. We could use a continuing supply of materials for the Industrial Arts Depart- ment. I would purcha'.ze 30-iO sets of books to he loaned to ninth graders and SO-100 physical education suits. Additional funds would supply money for free lunches, more field trips and admission expense, and an additional clerk. TITLE Ill-DIAGNOSTIC TREATMENT CENTER As a result of the Title III project in the Louisville area, a Diagnostic Treat- ment Center for the purpose of diagnosing and treating the learning problems of school children has been established. This Center. composed of psychologists, social workers, and educational specialists, very effectively complements and assists the school staffs in their endeavors to minimize the individual child's learning problems. The Center is providing an essential service to molly pupils in iur schools. The diagnosis and treatment of disturbed. handicapped. and retarded children have assisted us in meeting the needs of more pupils than this conununity has been able to serve in the past. As an innovation-that is, an operation by one school system with services available to public and non-public school children in five school systems-the Center has been successful and unique because of the lack of administrative problems often associated with such a coordinated undertaking. THE NEIGHBORHOOD YOUTH CORPS The Neighborhood Youth Corps is making a significant contribution to the Louisville Public School System. The current program has 400 enrollees who. while developing job skills, responsibility, and competencies in a variety of job opportunities. are making a positive contribution to the school system. The income, counseling, and job experiences in school are the primary reasons for the success of keeping these young people in school and in helping them com- plete their high school education. We have less than a three percent dropout rate in the program. STUDENT DRAMATIC ENRICH MENT PROGRAM Through attendance at the performances and study in the classroom, many students who never before had attended live performances of well-known plays have achieved a wholesome interest in live drama in the Student Dramatic En- richment Program funded through Title III E.S.E.A. The Louisville Board of Education, in cooperation with Actors Theatre of Louisville and public and non-public schools in Jefferson, Bulhitt, and Oldham Counties, has been administering this program with a $G6,525.00 tw-o-year grant. Thousands of high school students are able to attend performances of live drama at the Actors Theatre of Louisville, a local non-profit theatrical organization. Study Guides for the plays are furnished to teachers and students for classroom use before attendance at the performances. Transportation is furnished to those students w-ho live outside the Louisville district. PAGENO="0154" 976 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS EXHIBIT C.-LEARN MORE EARN MORE ADULT EDUCATION PROGRAM Seven terms of the Learn More Earn More Adult Education Program will have been conducted by the Louisville Board of Education between April 1965 and May 1967 with $198,730.00 in Federal grants under provisions of the Eco- nomic Opportunity Act. Enrollments for these evening classes, conducted in schools participating in the Community School Program, total 7,716. The pilot program, conducted in one elementary school in the summer of 1964, enrolled 416 adults. The enrollment for the current term, February-May 1967, is 1,558, classes being conducted in seven elementary and junior high schools two nights per week. Enrollment by courses is as follows: Basic Education, 221; High School Equivalency, 627; Business Education, 371; Home Management, 309; and Shop, 30. The great expansion of the pilot program was made possible by Federal funding. The program is planned and operated for adults 21 years of age or older and for young people who are 18 years of age and have been out of school for at least one year. It is organized for persons in these five major categories: (1) persons who want to gain skills in the fundamentals of educa- tion; (2) persons who want to prepare themselves to pass the General Edu- cation Development test: (3) persons who want to gain skills in business prac- tices and office procedures to enable them to find better employment.; (4) persons who want to manage their homes more efficiently; and (5) persons who want to learn how to use simple hand tools and machinery. The staff for the centers includes certificated principals, counselors, visiting teachers, and teachers regularly employed by the Louisville Public Schools. Through cooperation of the State Employment Office, job counselors and em- ployment officers regularly service the various centers. Many students have been upgraded on their jobs, many have realized in- crease in pay. and some have qualified for and found better paying Jobs. Many success stories testify to the effectiveness of the program. [From the Courier-Journal, Friday, Mar. 10, 1967] USE OF FUNDS FO~ DISADVANTAGED CHILDREN PRAISED FEDERAL TRAM CHECKS SCHOOL PROGRAM (By Gayle Griffith) The Louisville school system got a good grade yesterday on its over-all use of federal funds for disadvantaged children, along with some suggestions for improvement. Issuing the report card was a three-man team from the National Advisory (`ouncil for Education of Disadvantaged Children in Washington. The team, headed by Dr. Joseph Page, visited city schools to determine whether the $2.7 million authorized for Louisville thus far under the Elementary and Secondary Educat.ion Act of 196~ is being used effectively. "Not without exception, but close to without exception," it is, the team con- cluded in an oral report to city school administrators after visiting classes yesterday. The city school system received its first grant of $1.4 million last spring and spent the bulk of it on equipment. Of the $1.3 million authorized this fiscal year, $1.1 is being spent for remedial reading teachers, counselors, and teacher assistants now at work in 31 elementary schools and 13 junior and senior high schools. Of this year's grant, $100,000 is going for reading improvement pro- grams and equipment for disadvantaged children in city parochial schools. The team listed these `exceptions"-or areas where Louisville schools can improve: Parent involvement. There is "very substantial evidence" that parent involve- melt is as important as studeiit involvement in many programs for the culturally disadvantaged child, the team said, and parents are not involved in Louisville to the extent that they are in Cincinnati. Detroit, Chicago, Cleveland and other big citIes. lu-service training for teachers and teachers' aides. Though highly impressed with the quality of the teaching observed yesterday, the team felt that teachers ~huuid meet together, and with supervisors, more frequently to exchange ideas ip 1 encourage innovation. PAGENO="0155" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 977 City school supervisors commended the University of Louisville for its help in this direction. Asked about the University of Kentucky, City Supt. Samuel V. Noe said that U.K. and other state universities have not had the concept of the inner city schools' problems in the past and have geared their teacher train- ing programs more to the rural and suburban schoolteacher. `This is one problem that we'll have to work on with the state's teacher training institutions," Noe said. Parochial school participation. Only one parochial classroom under the project was visited yesterday, but the consultant who saw it called it "distress- ing," and in "sharp contrast" to the spirit and response in l)UbliC school class- rooms he saw. Though unwilling to generalize on the basis of one class visit, the consultants indicated that if this situation were typical, closer supervision should be exer- cised over parochial school participation to insure that the best available teachers and methods were being used. Among aspects of Louisville's program singled out for commendation yesterday were the over-all quality of teachers and teachers assistants, ability and interest grouping among elementary students in the program, and effective use of special equipment. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you, Dr. Noe. I think the committee from reading your statement will appreciate what an efficient school system you are operating in the city of Louisville. WTe certainly appreciate the way and the fine method you have taken advantage of the ESEA funds. Mr. NOE. Thank you. Mr. DODSON. Mr. Chairman, we now move from the metropolitan area back to the mountains. We have one of your constituents, Mr. Charles Clark, superintendent of the Floyd County schools. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead, Mr. Clark. I am glad to welcome you here. STATEMENT OF CHARLES CLARK, SUPERINTENDENT, FLOYD C0U~fl~Y SCHOOLS, PRESTO~BURG, KY. Mr. CLARK. Mr. Chairman and members of the House Education and Labor Committee, you must. have noticed that our statements are somewhat repetitious, but that is understandable when you consider that we made no effort to correlate in making arrangements for this presentation. However, you have noticed that these statements all agree in important philosophical educational ideas. It is a great source of satisfaction to a county school superintend- ent to have an opportunity to express the views of the people in his area to the national leaders who enact Federal educational legisla- tion. So often, as professional educators, we fear that educational and/or social legislation is tailored t.o urban needs, and that such leg- islation does not meet the needs of rural areas. You do well to hear school people from all geographical sections of the country and en- deavor to make legislation flexible enough to meet all needs. You, who make up this very important committee, have, made history and are in a position to lead in a great surge forward in public education. We, in the local school districts in the several States. are happy that the Federal Government is a full partner in the important job of ele- mentary and secondary education. You may look, even to Appa- lachia, for great leadership in this healthy partnership. We, the school superintendents from the east Kentucky counties located in the Seventh Congressional District, could reasonably feel that we PAGENO="0156" 978 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS have already made a great contribution to the cause of education, since we have had the good sense to continue to elect Carl D. Perkins as our Congressman. Since Congressman Perkins is a product of an area where educational deprivation was and still is the rule rather than the exception, he perhaps understands the need of aid to the edu- cationally deprived better than most Congressmen. We, the school people in the Seventh District, could reasonably feel that we have done our part for the cause of education in reelecting Carl I). Per- kins. If that were our only gift. to the cause, then we. would have made a significant contribution. If you have admired his devotion to public education as the second ranking member of your committee, then I warn you that you have as your chairman now, an Xmerican who lives, eats, and sleeps with the. idea that democracy will survive only through its willingness to face up to its educational responsibili- ty. He will, by his tireless efforts for the cause. spur von to greater efforts than any of you thought. possible. If you keep up with your chairman, then this shall be the most productive session in the. history of Congress. The enactment of the aid to elementary and secondary schools of 19G~ was an answer to Ii fellIng provers for an eve rwliel tiling number of dedicated school l)eople. It is no ser~ret that we would have pre.- ferre.d general, rather than cateirorical aid, but we are practical people and are doing our utmost to implement the legislation as it was writ- ten. We. in Floyd County. Ky.. in order to qualify for participation under Public Law S9_lñ. drea(l to take a county survey in order to btentify our educationally deprived children. Our efforts led us to the conclusion that almost i0 percent of our young people were de- prived and as a result, we are very much aware of the problems of educational deprivation. This awareness haunted us and compelled us to strive for answers. 1Ve sought answers with groups composed of parents. teachers, welfare workers, college instructors, adminis- trators and others. With the aid of the groups mentioned above., we identified our needs and even agreed on a priority arrangement for attacking the problems. We are making p ogress in Floyd County by spendin~ title I funds on remedial reading, in-~ervice teacher experiences, instructional ma- terials, classes for exceptional children: by adding special instructional units for physical education, libraries, ~-uidance. counselors, super- visors. and social workers as well as purchasing glasses for school-age incli~ents and making minor alterations to physical facilities where needed. Implementing Public Law 89-10 has led us to the realization that the education of the 1950's is no longer adequate for the 1960's and 1970's. Indeed Public Law 89-lO, a.s enacted in 196h. no longer fills the needs. Since oui' National, State, and local education partnership was founded in l9~S with the enactment of the elementary and second- ar'.- school bill, we have discovered that there is much uncertainty in dealing with lVashin.crfon. We never seem to know when the. funds in our entitlement will be available until after the start of cur school year. and this condition makes constructive. nianning extremely diffi- cult. Competent personnel is seldom available after the start of the school ear. If this shortcoming could be overcome on your part, ade- quate planning will result in more effective use of funds. PAGENO="0157" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 979 The uncertainty of Teacher Corps funding has resulted in a re- luctance on the part of school superintendents to make applications for the use of these people, who ma.y add materially to our educational programs. We urge you to act. favorably on this portion of Elemen- tary and Secondary Education Amendments of 1961. To insure adequate comprehensive educational planning on a State, regional, or local level, adequate funds should be made available to the States. A tremendous additional workload has been forced upon State and local agencies by Public Law S9-10, making it impossible with limited budget.s and personnel to even evaluate the effectiveness of the program. Adequate funds are needed for this important function, but those funds should, by all means, be channeled through State de- partments of education. We would strongly urge your favorable consideration of the amend- merits dealing with innovation in vocational education and expanded educational opportunities for handicapped children. Both of the amendments would mean much to all school systems in the country. Again, these funds should go through Stat.e departments of educa- tion in the several States. Gentlemen, I would call your attention to one other educational sit- uation which calls f,or your immediate action. School hoards all over the United Sta.tes are alarmed about an inevitable conflict. betwee.n school people who, as trained professionals, have done. a good job op- ~rat.ing Headst.art and the Office of Economic Opportunity which seems to fail t.o understand that. readiness is truh- a school function. We take issue with recent OEO guidelines for Headstart. requiring community action committee's recommendation for employees for Headstart programs before local boards or education may employ. And, Sam, we did not, have the same experience with the 1-Ieadstart office that you did. They told us that the guidelines meant exactly what they said, nothing more, nothing less. We are alarmed too by the OEO guidelines regarding so-called neoptism in employment of lleadstart. personnel. In many counties in Appalachia where qualified, certified personnel is limited and where most. people in the area are remotely related, there is a good possibility t.hat this rule may make operation of Headstart impossible. ~\Te maintain that Headstart can be most effectively and efficiently operated by the U.S. Office of Education and through the various St.ate departments of education, where there is always some degree of understanding of problems, in even the most remote section of each State. School boards are so disturbed by a lack of understanding on t.he part of OEO t.hat some local boards of education and superintend- ents may wash their hands of the whole Heaclstart program. Such action could only hurt children, who do not deserve such a fate. Again, we welcome you to a full partnership in this important. job of educating all our youth. This partnership is a great challenge to public educators all over the 50 States, as it must be t.o each of you a.s parents, lawyers, business people, and American citizens. We have no doubt about all members of the partnership accepting the challenge so that the great progressive movement in education shall proceed with dispatch. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and committee members. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much, Mr. Clark. PAGENO="0158" 980 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. HAWKINS. Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Mr. Hawkins. Mr. HAWKINS. I see that all the witnesses have apparently agreed that Headstart should be transferred over to the Office. of Education to be operated. I assume, by the school people locally. I do not know what the situation is in Kentucky. Chairman PERKINS. It is quite different from your area, the Watts area. Mr. HAWKINS. I assume that they are relating this recommenda- tion to the situation as it prevails in Kentucky. because in other States the programs operate very successfully by groups in the corn- munitv, including fraternities, sororities, and churches, and so forth. I am wondering whether or not they are making a distinction in this recommendation based on What prevails in Kentucky. Because certainly in some areas of the country we would not want this. We believe that parents and many of the personnel contribute their serv- ices rather than being paid. I don't know whether I should ask this particular witness or some of the others if the progra.m is to be oper- ated by the school people, in what way will you conduct the program so as to involve the parents, involve the personnel that at the present time are not being paid but are offering their services as part of the local contribution? What would you do about facilities that are now benz offered by private industry? Many of the programs are being operated in places that are not re- qliirncr compensation. How would you approach these practical prob- lems if the school people are to operate the programs exclusively. Mr. CLARK. Should I answer the question, Mr. Chairman? I will be rlad to. We have largely followed the suggestions of involvement of a great many people. in developing our Headstart programs. As far as we are concerned, in Kentucky that suggestion is followed implicitly, as it was in trvin~ to (le(~ide in Floyd County What our needs were under title I. However, we believe that final authority for employment in the State of Kentucky should he with the board of education, with the sunerintendent's recommendation. Now that ha.~ not, up to this time, posed a serious problem but we did not .~et. the revised guidelines until very recently from OEO. T~ seems to make the ease very strong and, as I have said, in Floyd County in telephone calls to the Headstart headquarters in Washing- ton they said the ~idelines mean exactly what they say. Mr. TTAWKTNS. May I interrupt to ask whether or not this would also be the situation if the Headst.art program is operated by a non- school group? Would you still insist that you should have a right to say who should he employed and who should not be employed? Mr. CLARK. No, we would not. It so happens in the schools in Kentucky, Headstart programs are operated exclusively by school peonle. They have the only facilities available for Headstart. Mr. hAWKINS. You have none that are being operated by groups other than school people? Mr. CLARK. No. Mr. HAWKINS. May I ask you this. Do you have any representation on the old community action agencies of school people? Are they not represented on the OEO community action committees? PAGENO="0159" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 981 Mr. CLARK. Yes, we do have those representatives. We do give re- ports of educational progress regularly to the coinmumty action group. Mr. H~~wKINs. Then are not the schools therefore represented in community action agencies and therefore (10 have a voice in what goes on in Headstart programs? Mr. CLARK. Yes. But, again, we are back to the problem of the Kentucky law which says, and since board of education operate Head- start in eastern Kentucky, we are right back to the point which says that Kentucky law states very clearly that employment can be made only upon the recommendation of the school superintendent. I recognize tha.t problem would not exist if we did not operate Headstart. But since if we did not operate Headstart we would not have Headstart, that is a problem to us. Mr. HAWKINS. I want to thank the witness for being frank in his answer. I merely wanted to suggest that differences sometimes do lie between one State and another, but we would certainly not want this recommendation carried out in our particular State. Inso- far as my experience ha,s proved this program would not operate successfully unless we (lid have the involvement of many groups, t.he school people certainly, but many other groups also. Mr. BELL. Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Bell. Mr. BELL. Mr. Clark, I want to say that I completely concur with what you are saying relative to Headstart. One problem was revealed in the Wolf Report. which indicated that. youngsters that were in the Headst.art program for 3 or 4 months and then went into their regular school system, were found going back to their previous low level. Very poor conditions, poor teachers, inadequate teaching system. So their Headstart, was really lost to them. They lost ground, so to speak, when they went in the regular system as before. I think a coordinated effort. like this through the. regular school sys- tem, from He.adstart. up through the primary grades so you don't do one without. a fohlowthrough in the primary grades. It is an educa- tional program. I~t us keep it an educational program. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead, Mr. Dodson. Mr. DODSON. Mr. Chairman, the next witness is a member of the Kentucky State Board of Education, Mr. Henry Pogue. Chairman PERKINS. You may proceed, Mr. Pogue. STATEMENT OF HENRY POG lIE, JR., CHAIRMAN, STATE BOARD OP EDUCATION, COMMONWEALTH OF KENTTTCKY Mr. POGUE. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am Henry Pogue, Jr., chairman, State board of education, Commonwealth of Kentuc.ky. On behalf of the members of the State board of education, may I express my appreciation to the Committee on Education a.nd Labor for the privilege of appearing before you. Also, may I t.ake this op- portunity to thank this distinguished group for t.he deep concern you have showii for the cause of public education in our great. country, and more especially for the schools of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. I am here today to voice some continuing concerns relating to a few basic concepts and operational controls that are being advocated under PAGENO="0160" 982 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Federal legislation with respect to public education. More specifically I would like to call your attention to some aspects of proposed H.R. 6230 which is currently being reviewed. Kentucky Revised Statute 156.035 gives to the State board of edu- cation the legal authority for the management and control of the public schools of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. The State board of education, through necessity, needs and desires to understand fully the scope and impact of programs of an educational nature that are either fully or partially supported from Federal funds. Based on the preceding factors, funds designated as aid to pre- school, elementary, and secondary education should be channeled through the TT.S. Office of Education and in turn to the State depart- nients of education and the local school districts in accordance with State laws. The State board of education has for many years supported all at- tempts of `the Kentucky Department of Education in providing op- portunities for better and coordinated planning on short- and long- term bases. Just recently a "survey of surveys" of the department of education was completed under the direction of Dr. Finis Engleman. This survey pointed up `the need for educational planning to continue in the legally constituted agencies of State government. Manage- ment consultants advocate close relationships between planning and operation. The State board of education would like to go on record as support- ing the idea of the need for better and more coordinated planrnng at the State level, but would oppose the basic concepts as proposed in part B of title V of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act under which much of the planning authority of the department of education would possibly be eliminated. Currently, about 1~ percent of the support `for public education in Kentucky comes from Federal funds. I might add that 33 percent is local support and 52 percent is State support. This is a small portion of Kentucky's total school financing, hut. a category of money that requires an extraordinary amount of time in accountability and gen- eral control. Some of the difficulty arises from the categorical aid al)10~ClI. We believe Federal aid to the States for education should be based on a foundation-program Pi'inciple which would be distributed to the State departments of education based on need and ability. Many of the local school districts advise us that great difficulties are being experienced in areas of fiscal management, and especially in areas of planning for utilization of Federal funds. This has been especially true for title I. ESEA, funds. Final allotment figures were. not. known to the Commonwealth of Kentucky until late February, thereby creating much confusion in local school districts relative to ~uilgetary matters. It. is recommended that the authorizations and appropriations for Federal aid to education programs be made early enough in the fiscal year preceding the school year the are to l)e made operative. This approach would seem to greatly assist school officials at the local and State levels. Mr. Chairman, your prior remarks w'ere very encouraging in that regard. PAGENO="0161" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 983 Title III, ESEA, has offered to Kentucky education unusual op- portunities for cooperative planning on the part of the local school districts. Innovative practices, with ultimate long-term gains to our schoolchildren will be the end result of such efforts. Continuous ef- forts should probably be made to update and support the concepts developed in such a worthwhile educational program. The educa- tional "feedback" to the local and State officials will also have far reaching effect on educational progress in Kentucky. The State board of education recommends that all title III, ESEA, proposals be initially routed through and receive final approval by the State departments of education. All Federal funds in support of programs in title III should be route.d through the State departments of education. The program of vocational education in Kentucky needs to be great- ly expanded. Additional funds are needed for the construction of area vocational school facilities to house needed programs. Additional personnel must be trained to staff vocational programs. The work- study program needs to be expanded in order to care for more persons needing financial assistance to take full advantage of these types of programs. The State board of education recommends that the maximum au- thorization of $225 million in the 1963 Vocational Act be raised and that additional appropriations be made for the training of personnel needed in vocational education. Support of the expansion of work- study programs is offered. The following recommendations are offered concerning the Adult Education Act of 1966: A supplemental appropriation to provide financing at the maximum level authorized for the current fiscal year. An appropriation at the maximum level authorized for adult basic education in fiscal 1968, and such funds in fiscal years thereafter as Congress may authorize. Establish a consistent definition of "adult basic education" to be used throughout the act and fix the minimum age of eligibility at 16 years. As a final recommendation the Kentucky State Board of Education generally opposes the regionalization concept as has been developed by the U.S. Office of Education. It is felt that this type of an ap- proach simply constitutes another layer of regulatory control over the educational structure of the States. Again, please accept my most sincere appreciation for the honor of having appeared before this distinguished body. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much, Mr. Pogue. Mr. Dodson. Mr. DODSON. The next witness, Mr. Chairman, is Mr. Janies Baker, superintendent of schoo's at Middlesboro, Ky. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead, Mr. Baker. STATEMENT OF JAMES E. BAKER, SUPERINTENDENT OF scHooLs, MIDDLESBORO, KY. Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is .Jarnes E. Baker, superintendent of the Middlesboro Independent Schools of Middlesboro, Ky. Middlesboro is loated in Bell County 75-492--G7-pt. 2-11 PAGENO="0162" 984 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS in southeastern Kentucky. It adjoins the States of Tennessee and Virginia at what is known as Cumberland Gap. I want to thank the committee for the opportunity of appearing here today. I commend each of you for your interest in the educa- tion of the children of this Nation. Recognizing that education is the key to raising the standards of living and the wage-earning power of the poverty-stricken and unemployed citizens of this country. I believe that education is the major means by which most people are going to be able to prepare themselves to shake the shackles of poverty~ to make themselves employable, and to take their rightful place in society. In fact, I know of no one in Bell County, Ky., who has an education and wants a job that is not employed. In my opinion, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 was one of the finest pieces of legislation that has ever been enacted. As a personal evaluation of this act, I wish to illustrate what it has meant to the Middlesboro Independent School District. We have 2,933 students in our district. Of this number we have had 1.350 students who have participated in programs under title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. This is approxi- mately 48 percent of the total enrollment. Seventy-three of this num- ber are enrolled in a parochial school. Title I programs of the Ele- mentary and Secondary Education Act were implemented for the first time in our school dist.rict on March 1, 1966, and have now been in operation 12 full months. With the help of this program for the first time the Middlesboro school system now has (and for the infor- mation of the others I have added an exhibit of some pictures of the title I program that have been in operation in the Middlesboro school system, which I have passed on to the chairman. I only have one copy and they are at his disposal): 1. Libraries with certified librarians in every school. This includes books, library shelving, audiovisual materials, and so forth, and these libraries are open 12 months of the year. Not one of our elementary schools or the junior high school had a librarian or library services before. There is a daily average of 495 participating students who use these libraries throughout the system. These same libraries are being utilized by the teaching staff through the use of filmstrips, films, and audiovisual equipment. 2. For the first time full-time physical fitness programs are in opera- tion for all students, grades 1-12. This includes equipment and ma- terials as recommended by the President's Council on Physical Fitness and is established on the same principles and criteria. Again, none of the elementary or the junior high schools offered these programs before. Physical partioipation improvements Mar. 1, 1966 Mar. 1, 1967 Rope climbing 4 out of25 10 out of25. Pull-ups (chinning) 9outof50 2ooutof39. Standing broad Jumps 4 feet 3 inches 4 feet 6 inches. Sit-ups 30 45. These comparisons were made on the same students within a given class. That is indicative of the average throughout theY school sys- PAGENO="0163" ELEMENTARY A~D SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS ~S5 tern. The program in physical fitness is received with avid partici- pation with the desire on the behalf of the students t.o go to school. 3. Three programs on remedial reading with trained teachers are now equipped and in operation supplying the needs of those who are reading below grade level. Before we had only one teacher to serve the whole school district. The following illustration is the average improvement by students participating in this program under reme- dial reading who were reading below grade level. Reading vocabulary Grade: increase 3d 2 years 4th 1.3 years. 5th 6 months. There were 1,092 students involved in the remedial reading program. 4. This program has provided guidance counselors for all elemen- tary students. All guidance counselors are fully certified. There were no guidance counselors at the elementary level before. 5. We now have the services of a full-time social worker who works with the deprived children, with their parents, and with other agen- cies such as social, welfare, and governmental agencies to provide everything available for the full help of these students. This service was not provided before. Overall attendance increased during this period of time 1.35 percent. Many children now receive help from other coordinating agencies. 6. A summer school program (1966) for students that were at low grade level in grades 7, 8, and 9. Total enrollment was 196. Of this number, 180 completed summer school. Of this number, 176 students were able to advance to the next grade level. Without the summer school program, the majority of those 176 students would have been retained in the same grade. It has never been possible for this school district to offer a summer school program at this grade level before. 7. Health services are provided through the employment of a full- time registered nurse. This person coordinating the health factors with the local and State health departments. (a) Most of the students are now using tooth brushes and having followup visits to the dentist. (b) Many students have obtained eye glasses, had tonsillectomies, dental treatment, and conseq~uently are now able to do normal work. (c) Proper treatment of minor injuries has curtailed infections and has prevented absenteeism. (d) The nurse has helped tear down, by her acceptance, the heredi- tary superstitions involving inoculations, medical services, and fear of doctors. (e) The maintaining of thorough and accurate personal health records. 8. Two hundred children per day have been provided a full class-A lunch plus adequate milk needs. In most situations this is the best meal these students have. I believe that one of the reasons for the success of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act through the State department of edu- cation to the local participating district; that the local district has been able to make evaluations of its needs and designed programs to PAGENO="0164" 986 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS meet these needs; to utilize the creative imagination of the local pro- fessional people and other supporting agencies and supplementing the major needs of that particular district.. I l~ow this has been true in our district as all of our professionally trained people, plus civic groups, health departments, news media, and many other agencies were involved in evaluating and setting forth our most pressing needs. By this act being administered through our State department of education, we have been able to utilize the work of trained professional people, to coordinate programs under this act with the programs al- ready in existence and to make these new innovations in education an incorporate part; of the total education program and not something that would stand alone. By this, we have utilized in title I programs, established certification standards of teaching personnel, standards of accreditation, health st.andards, and all other requirements which are basic to strong education programs. The three. big objections that I have to the programs that we have been directly involved with under the Elementary and Secondary Educ.ation Act of 1965 is the excessive amount of paperwork con- nected with title I applications and followup information. 1. I believe that forms for reporting finance, the objectives, the dis- semination of the statistics, and knowledge gained from project. evalu- ations, should be standardized and be put on time periods t.o the degree that they would be influential in support; of projects and be appropri- ate for proper review and evaluation. I sincerely believe that budgets should be prepared, accurate accounting be followed, and information and evaluation be supplied in support of t.he program. But this should be in line with that which is reality and will be effective. 2. Each school should be allocated sufficient funds for the proper administration of title I project.s. The present allotment for admin- istration is 8 percent of the total allocation. You cannot provide ef- ficie.nt supervision, accounting, and the overall cost of administration and st.ay within this amount, unless you have an extremely large grant. By c.ost of administration, I refer to- (a) Cost of an administrator or supervisor; (b) Bookkeeping or accounting services; (c) Publications such as advertisement of bids on materials and equipment, the annual financial reports and evaluation of projecth; (d) Postage; (e) Telephone;and (f) Travel-some limited travel controlled by State or National levels, calling meetings, or something of that sort. 3. The third, but. probably the one thing that needs an immediate revision, is the time of year when local districts are notified and given their final appropriations and allocations. This is most important as school districts operate. on a fiscal-year basis beginning July 1 of each year and running through June 30 of the following year. If information could be supplied within a time limit which would, along with the necessary guidelines and other criteria, for school districts to plan Elementary and Secondary Education Act programs that will coincide with the. 1)asic education programs that are in operation. Without t.his and not Imowing when projects will be approved or the amount of the school dist.ricts grant, the respective school districts cannot: PAGENO="0165" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 987 (a) Employ trained, certified, and qualified people in the respective needed areas. These teachers are really the critical teachers who are in demand throughout the Nation. They can gain employment any place, and will unless they can obtain valid contracted employment giving them security. It' is vital that districts with a high concentra- tion of low-income families and educationally deprived children have the services of these specialists if the intent of this program is met. (14 School calendars and programs of activities involving projects under this program must be set and planned for to meet. and utilize all available factors. (c) Programs requiring classroom space, transportation, health services, and all of the supported services require detailed planning that will give full benefit to each child. (d) In many situations where trained personnel are not available, the colleges and universities will plan a summer school program as a part of their offerings to provide training for t.heese individuals who in turn can put these programs into effect. This can only be done when you know ahead of time and all of these efforts ca.n be coordinated and utilized. Amendments-Title V Elementary and Secondary Education Act: It has been proposed that an amendment. be. added to title V which would provide, grants for comprehensive educational planning and evaluation. Comprehensive and continued planning for a high quality of education should be provided for; that. the authority for this plan- ning and the involvement of different. age.ncies to a.id in the planning should be administered and supervised by the State. departments of edu- cation. Here again I emphasize the need for having educational pro- grams coordinated by trained professional people.. Programs for education should not be independent., but. should be coordinated wit.h the continuing and existing programs. New programs will be act.ivated and should be to meet the continued educat.ional demands. It is reasonable to assume that new programs will require classrooms, transport.a.t.ion, lunchrooms, playgrounds, and so forth. Then, these same facilities will be needed to serve bot.h the new and the present programs. Certainly, the thoughts and ideals of other people and agencies, as well as the professiona.l teacher's, should be utilized in planning new ways to meet the educational needs of all children. I subscribe to the belief that. local and State governments should continue to inc.rease and improve their financial obligations t.o educa- tion. But., t.his can only be done when this planning is carried out and supported through an informed public as to t.he educational nee.ds of the respective communities. Amendments-Title VI Elementary and Secondary Education Act: Education for t.he handicapped children of this country has been secondary and ne.eds full implementation. By this, I mean that the educational needs of every child, regardless of his handicap, should be provide.d for. No child who is handicapped should ever be de- prived of an education. The argument. that there is not enough in his classification to provide an adequate program or that he lives too far from a program designed to meet. his needs is not, valid. The proposed regional resource centers which would be authorized by PAGENO="0166" 988 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS amendment to title VI is a good start. But I believe that it should go further than that: that training centers for children should be in each district or at least by combining a small number of districts within a given geographical area which would put the centers where the children are and within a reasonble driving distance which would make. it available to every child. I suggest and recommend that: 1. It be a requirement that every school building constructed in the United States provide classrooms for the handicapped on the first floor level with ramps leading to the outside and with the bath- rooms designed to accommodate these children. 2. A program for the recruitment and training of personnel to work with the handicapped be intensive and become a major project of all educational agencies. This program can be strengthened by more colleges and universities offering training programs in the field of education of the handicappe.d children. I recommend that these programs be continuous and established for at least 5-year periods in advance. Amendments-The Vocational Act of 1963: Vocational education is as important as a.ny other phase of education. The Vocational Act of 1963 is a strong and sound piece of legislation. The amendments that have been proposed to this act are vital and should have the support. of every educator in the country. I doubt. if any person really knows or can visualize how great the need for education in the vocations really is. As vocational educa- tion is really put. into effect. throughout this country and the public becomes aware of its importance~ the demand will be greater from the employer as well as the employee. In Middlesboro, Ky., as well as Bell County and the adjoining areas you simply cannot, find trained plumbers, electricians, printers, com- mercial cooks, bakers, auto mechanics, bricklayers, sheet.metal workers, carpenters. painters, and most all of t.he other trades. Common labor is plentiful, but not the skilled or t.rained workers. When any form of construction is carried out. in our area, the workers in most. of these trades have to he imported and the native people go unemployed or go to the. metropolitan areas to seek employment. This is true even though a large amount of construction is in force most. of the time. Not only is the construction area not able to gain the trained worker in this area, but the. small business or service companies cannot ob- tain qualified personnel to meet. the needs for the domestic services. Guidance and counseling of students at the elementary, secondary, and levels above these are. most important and needs full support under this act. To explore and cultivate the interest and ability of our youth into careers is a must. If there is one element left out in helping a stu- dent to £nd himself and to put his ability to work, then all of us are wrong. Let all of us help all the youth of today to take his place in a meaningful society. Distribution of Title I-Elementary and Secondary Education Act Funds: I wish to express my deepest appreciation and full support to the plan to use one-half of the national average per pupil expenditure for education as the new base for the distribution of title I funds under the. Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. This act was PAGENO="0167" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 989 conceived, enacted, and is concerned with the education of the disad- vantaged child. Then it is right that the needs of each child should be considered to be equal. The materials and equipment used in supporting the education of each disadvantaged child in this country will be manufactured and supplied from practically every State. The trained professional teacher personnel will not all be native born but will be supplied from all areas of this Nation. As Kentucky colleges will train thousands of teachers each year, of which a high percentage will go to other States, then so will many teachers from ot.her States find employment and happiness in Kentucky. In fact, during the past 12 months since title I has been in effect, the Middlesboro school system has obtained the services of teachers from New Jersey, New York, Florida, Wash- ington, Ohio, Tennessee, and Virginia. Without the help of these fine teachers some of the strong title I programs now in operation in our district could not and would not have been fully implemented. U.S. Office of Education should administer all Federal education legislation: I strongly recommend that legislation enacted by Con- gress for the purpose of education be administered by the U.S. Office of Education. Programs in education administered by other agencies can be in conflict with one phase or another of the existing educational programs including some phases of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. By conflict, I mean that it's involving children from the same households, the need of classrooms, transportation, food, health, and medical services. I am not opposed to the basis or guide- lines of these programs. In no sense do I mean this; I simply believe that programs for education with the aim of uplifting the educational level of all people should be and will have to be in support of each other and be coordinated for full effect. In my opinion, the programs administered from the U.S. Office of Education through the State departments of education to the local school districts have been oper- ated more efficiently and with the greater return for each dollar spent. One of the programs I strongly recommend to he administered by the U.S. Office of Education is the Headstart program now funded through the Office of Economic Opportunity. My reasons are~: 1. Headstart is the beginning of the formal education of these des- ignated children. Their education is and will be continuous through their life. Headstart should be operated in school classrooms pro- vided with adequate lunchroom, bathroom, and many other services that are needed for the operation of this program. 2. Personal and health records of these children shoul(l begin with Headstart and should be permanent and cumulative throughout their school life. 3. I can see no reason why educational equipment. such as audio- visual equipment could not he utilized in Headstart as well as title I or vocational programs, et cetera. 4. Permanent employees of local boards of education such as social workers, school nurses, supervisors, and many others could be utilized to a more efficient operation. 5. Local boards of education in long-range planning of classrooms and facilities could provide for this program of education. 6. When this program is operated under another agency, and t.he personnel are employed without any form of qualification or knowl- PAGENO="0168" 990 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS edge of educational processes, and local school districts are told that they take t.hese people or it will be operated by other agencies; then it will not and cannot work to the full benefit of the child. Please place the administration of the Headstart program in the U.S. Office of Education. Proposed adult educat.ion program: I recommend a program of adult education at the high school level, for the thousands of people in this country who quit high school before they completed the re- quirements for graduation. The requirements here could possibly be the same as for the high school age child now enrolled. Most of these people who quit high school realize that they made a mistake and now have a~ strong desire to go back and finish high school. Due to obligations to families and employment, these people cannot attend a regular school program. Then, too, many would be embarrassed to go to school with their children and have to compete with a young energetic mind. The same school facilities and equipment could be utilized to operate such a program. This would mean that public schools could be used ~nore hours in a day and longer periods in the year. Why should they sit idle? Think of what. this would do to improve the capabilities and the wage earning power of the people of this country, and what it would do to improve the overall thought as to our responsibility t.o education of all. Consequently, the~ financing of a total educational program will be better received with higher values and everyone will be the recipients one way or the other. School construction: A. shortage of classrooms for the general edu- cation of children is now at the critical stage. But, it will be more critical before funds a.re available and classrooms can be constructed. Most of the school districts in Kentucky have extended their bonding ability to it.s capacity. Yet, the needs have not been met. I am sure this exists in most, if not all, other States. The new programs of education are going to require additional classrooms. `Where are they to come from? We need the aid of the Federal Government toward financial aid for the construction of classrooms and other educational facilities. I do not believe nor propose that this be carried out by the Federal Government alone; that it should be a combined effort of the local, State, and Federal Governments. That if Congress would enact leg- islation for school construction, with matching funds to come from the local and State governments, then this classroom shortage could be met in a very few years. Thank you for giving me the opportunity of presenting my state- ments on behalf of education. I am very humble and honored that you have granted me the time. The M~ddlesboro Board of Education asked me to extend their appreciation to each of you for your untiring efforts t.o the education of the children of Middlesboro and the Nation. In behalf of the Middlesboro Board of Education, I would like to extend an invitation to any or all of you to visit Middlesboro and to see the real values that have come from your programs. Thank you again. PAGENO="0169" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY ED~TCATION AMENDMENTS 991 Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much, Mr. Barker. I have heard of your outstanding school system over these many years. I appreciate your coming here today. You made mention of the out- side school teachers coming into your area. Did you acquire most of your remedial reading teachers or social workers and school nurses and supervisors and guidance counselors from the outside, or did you recruit those at the local level? Mr. BAKER. Most of them come from the local level. I used the term `~influence these programs" because some of these people were presently employed in othe.r positions or as basic classroom teachers. They made a replacement. for the people who were assigned t.o title I projects or programs. In certain phases, for example, special edu- cation in the area of mental retardation, this person came to us from another State, trained in another State and came t.o us to work in the Middle.sboro school system. By far most. of these people who are involved are and have been within the faculty of the school system. Chairman PERKINS. Dr. Dodson. Mr. DODSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Our next speaker is Mr. Hugh Spaulding, superintendent of Marion County Schools. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead, Mr. Spaulding. STATEMENT OF HUGE C. SPAULDING, SUPERINTENDENT OF MARION COUNTY SCHOOLS, LEBANON, KY. Mr. SPAULDING. Mr. Chairman, distinguished members of the Edu- cation and Labor Committee, I am Hugh C. Spaulding, superintendent of school in Marion County, Lebanon, Ky. I represent. a largely rural school system in central Kentucky with a total population of approxi- mately 18,000 people and a school census of approximately 5,000 children. Twelve hundred seventy-one, of our children, or 23 percent are classified as children from low-income families. I am very glad to have this opportunity to appear before you to participate in t.he orderly processes of representative government, and to present this statement giving my views regarding certain aspects of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 added about 15 percent t.o our annual budget for the operation of our school system. It has enabled us t.o provide many of t.he t.hings that we have known we needed for many years, but for which funds were not available. Some of t.he principal additions made in t.he staff, facilities, and services of our school system are as follows: 1. Nine special remedial reading teachers, serving 753 pupils in 10 schools. 2. Six special physical education teachers, serving 1,792 pupils in 10 schools. 3. One special teacher for slow-learning children, serving 16 pupils in one school. 4. Much valuable audiovisual education equipment., materials and supplies for these new special teachers of remedial reading. 5. TweTve teachers' aids to assist. these new special teachers in the respective instructional areas. 6. Fre.e lunches for 84 children from low-income families in 10 schools. PAGENO="0170" 992 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 7. Several thousand new library books to improve school library serv~ces. As a.n example of the benefits derived from the Federal aid to educa- tion program, I wish to quote from a report on a preliminary evalua- tion conducted in our school system on the effectiveness of our remedial reading program: Si percent of the pupils checked out more books to read, the parents stated that 73 percent of the pupils were reading more at home, and that 76 percent had a better attitude towards school. Much good has been accomplished with the assistance of Federal funds, but there is much that~ still needs to be done. We have not yet reached our goal of excellence in education. As long as hundreds of people in our county. thousands of people in our State, and millions of people in our Nation go through life partially blindfolded by pre- ventable ignorance, we still have a long way to go. I request that you give the following suggestions serious considera- tion as you study ways to improve the present law: 1. School authorities should be given definite information regarding the available Federal funds several months in advance of the beginning of a school year. This is very important if the most effective use is to be made of these funds in the employment of additional personnel and in the arrangement of facilities and services. 2. Any special planning agency for education on t.he State level should be under the general supervision of State departments of educa- tion instead of the Governors' offices for the following reasons: (1) Personnel, organization, and experience are more readily avail- able. (2) An educational center, such as a State department of education, is more appropriate for an educational planning series than a direct political center such as a Governor's office. 3. One-half of the national average per-pupil expenditure for edu- cation should be used as the base for the distribution of title I funds. Using one-half of the average per-pupil expenditure for education in each State as the basis for distribution in each individual State penal- izes the poorer States. It helps to perpetuate a system whereby the rich get richer and the poor get children. WTe are one nation, and Federal policy should be directed toward t.he goal of achieving the same high st.andard of living in all States. 4. The authori tv of community action committees to recommend the staff to be employed in the Headstart program should be eliminated. The community action committees are organized under the auspices of the Office of Economic Opportunity. Many are doing excellent work, but school authorities are generally better trained and prepared to select and organize the Headstart programs, which are essentially edu- cational in nature. ~. Paperwork should be reduced and guidelines restricted as much as possible. For example. we suggest the elimination or at least the modification of the calculations now required in each school center to determine that a certain specific number or a certain specific percentage of economically underprivileged children are in that school center before the benefits of the present law can be made available to any of the children in that school center. We doubt that it is necessary or PAGENO="0171" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS U93 desirable to carry such calculations below the level of the local school system. 6. The U.S. Office of Education should administer national educa- tional funds and programs. The splintering of national e(lucational efforts is almost certain to be less efficient and effective than would a policy of continuity and c.onsistency which is more likely to develop under a united educational organization. With all due respect to the House Education and Labor Committee, I venture to suggest that some day even this committee may well be separated into two commit- tees, one in the field of labor and another in the field of education. 7. The definition of a low-income family used as an important factor in the distribution of title I funds should be changed. A definition of a low income, or economically deprived family with an annual income of $1,999 and denies Federal assistance for 10 children in a family with an annual income of $~,0ul, in my opinion is wrong. Such a definition of a low-income family almost seems to be a device designed to discriminate against the disadvantaged: however, I am sure that such was not the case. The use of this definitioii of a low- income family may, in a long span of years, be effective in sonic small way as a family size limitation measure, but it can never be justified as a fair means to use to provide help for needy, economically deprived, underprivileged, and living children. 8. Funds should be provided for schoolhouse construction on the elementary and secondary level. Schoolhouses, in a very vital way, are the real fortifications of a democracy. Any effort to produce a st.rong and effective educational program for our Nation as a whole, without insuring first of all a strong and effective elementary and secondary program, is almost certainly doomed to failure because of the simple engineering truth that you cannot build a solid structure on a weak foundation. In conclusion, I wish to express the gratitude of the people I rep- resent to those of you who helped to make the Elementary and Second- ary Education Act of 1965 the law of the land. Federal aid to elemen- t.ary and secondary education has been one of the dreams of educational leaders for many years. A combination of factors, all diminishing in force, have united in the past to defer this dream. The modern American poet Larigston Hughes, once asked this question in one. of his poems, "What happens to a dream deferred? Doe.s it dry up like a raisin in the sun?" He w-as writing about. the kind of dream which comes from the searching heart of humanity as it seeks the golden day of peace and prosperit.y for all people. His answer was that such a dream does not dry up like a raisin in the sun, that it cannot be locked up in a jail, that it cannot even be permanently deferred. The dreams of education are of such dreams as the poet. wrote about.. Federal aid to education was once a dream, and it was t.he kind of dream that kept coming back until it became a reality. It will, I am sure, be improved in many ways in the years ahead in order to give our yoimg people the educational and intellectual assistance they need to help them to solve the many problems of our society. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you, Mr. Spaulding. PAGENO="0172" 994 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. Dodson? Mr. DODSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, at this time I would like to present to this group a Kentucky legislator from Hardin County who came along to keep Mr. Burkhead straight-Sam Watkins. Sam is a very good friend of our down in the Kentucky Legislature. He is here today to hear our testimony. Chairman PERKINS. I am glad you are up here. Mr. WATKINS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. DODSON. The next witness is Dr. Richard \TanHoose, super- intendent of not only the largest school system in Kentucky but the fastest growing system in Kentucky. STATEMENT OF RICHARD VAN HOOSE, SUPERINTEIThENT, JEFFERSON COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, KENTUCKY Mr. \ANHOOSE. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I a.m Richard VanHoose~ superintendent of the Jefferson County schools, a system employing over 5,000 personnel to serve 75,000 chil- dren enrolled in the public schools of a suburban, metropolitan area of Kentucky. Fift.een years ago our pupil membership was less than 20~00O. Since that time, we have grown at the rate of 3,000 to 6,000 pupils a year. Next year we expect to enroll 82,000 or more, so you can see that we are ble.ssed with the advantages and disadvantages of phenomenal growth. We appreciate the. contribution the Federal Government has made through the legislative programs you are now considering, and we are aware of your desire to strengthen these programs. You are acting wisely when you invite an intercha.nge of thought from those who have had the responsibility of using the funds that Congress intended to help the schoolchildren of this land. We believe they have been helped. We believe, as you do, that this legislation can be improved in the light of our experience of our past few years, and we are most grateful for the opportunity to offer suggestions as you consider amendments to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. In se.tting up programs funded by Public Law 89-10, our biggest headache has been the delay in receiving guidelines, authorization, and final allocations, as well as some. confusion caused by conflicting direc.- t.ives. Poverty qualifications are defined one way by the Office of Economic Opportunity, and another by Public Law 89-10. Paper- work in connection with these. programs is extremely heavy, and is further complicated in some cases by requests for information not in- cluded in the original guidelines. WTe realize that. legislation alone cannot break this logjam of paperwork. We are sympathetic to the need for good planning and for an evaluation that. will show how well the project. did what it set out. to do. We believe consideration might be given to placing the administration of all educational legislation under the u.S. Office of Education. It would eliminate some of the present confusion about communicat- ing with Washington. Hopefully, it would also eliminate some of the PAGENO="0173" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDICATION AMENDMENTS 9~5 duplication and conflicting directives which now exist. We want. to cooperate in every way possible in setting up, operating, and evaluat- ing programs under Public. Law 89-10, but our ability to plan and staff these programs adequately is reduced when delay and confusion interfere. The children do not. receive full benefit.. Earlie.r annual appropria.t.ions for the Elementary and Secondary Education Act would permit better planning and staffing. In my opening remarks, I referred to the rapid growth that has been experienced by our school system. We believe that any school system so affected is under conditions of unusual stress, and that the Federal Government rightly could permit the use of Federal funds to supple- ment local effort in housing schoolchildren. You will find a. housing crisis in almost eve.ry community experiencing rapid growth on a large scale, and this results in crowded classrooms, double sessions, and all the othe.r problems created whe.n the school population expands faster than the tax base which supports it. Because of our housing shortage, we have not always been able to house title I programs where they w-ere most needed. Some of our title I counselors operate out of the school bookstore. Remedial reading teachers are holding classes with small groups in dressing rooms off the stage of the school auditorium. Since we are so des- perate for housing for the average child, we have been able t.o provide very little in the way of special facilities for children with special needs. Funds applicable to construction would alleviate these l)roblems. In amending the Fair Labor Standards Act to include. schools, Congress has shown concern for those who were getting less for the going rate for the work they do, and this is a good thing. At the same time, it has worked a hardship on schools attempting to provide equitable distribution of the limited funds available to them. The time and a half provision has created immediate problems, as the minimum wage is increased to $1.60 an hour over the next~ 5 years, years, these problems will increase. Can the Federal Government give some support to help the financially pressed public schools meet these w-age requirements? In support of Superintendents Burkhead and stone, let me say that the recent amendment of Public Law 874 will mean a loss in revenue to the Jefferson County schools of about $145,546. If it is not possible to remove this amendment, we would strongly urge the exemption of installations with more than 2,000 children. In Ken- tucky, the local school system's hands are tied by State law, and we are helpless to correct this situation. Our foundation program is based on local taxes, and since Federal property is not taxable for local pur- poses, Public. Law 874 money is not counted as local effort w-lien foundation calculations are made. Chairman PERKINS. Let me interrupt you to make the observation that. I am sure the gentleman realizes it. was the policy all through the years to get the Federal Government out of the business of opnrat_ ing schools and let. the local boards of education shoulder tire re~pm~i- hilify. I am of the opinion that. that. is what PI'oml)ted the amend- ment, last year. If I recall correctly throughout the country the school people in general w-anted this approach at. the State level. PAGENO="0174" 996 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS They wanted to participate in financing the cost of education on the theory that it was an economic benefit to the State by virtue of the military installation. If that was true at Fort Knox, I mean if the State participated on that. theory I would not see that we would have any problem down there at all. But be that as it may, we have a problem presently and I will certainly do everything in my power to see that we cure the problem if the State does not make the proper interpretation. I personally feel that this policy that we have been processing under has been sound over the years. It has been more or less our policy to try to get the Government away from operating schools on the theory that it is an economic benefit to the State, these military installations. But be that as it. may. this committee will try to find an equitable solution and we will take another look at this amendment that was put in here last year. But what strikes me at the present time, Mr. Vanlloose. no other school in the Nation has raised the question on this amendment. and last year I went against administration's wishes in rewriting the impact legislation and the committee sustained my views. We all worked together to make sure that we did not tear down the impacted area program legislation, a program which I feel has worked so well. Now, this is one particular instance in Kentucky where we do not, as I see it, have the interpretation of the law that most other States have. Maybe we are right down there and the other States are wrong, I just don't. know. But we will take a.nother look at it.. Mr. \ANHO0SE. Thank you, Mr. Perkins. Mr. PrcINsK'. Mr. Chairman, apropos of the colloquy, I was won- dering whether Mr. Vanlloose would care to comment on the sugges- tion that has been made here by ot.hers that we include children living in public housing units in impacted areas for Federal aid. Would that help your county? You said you were losing $145,000. If they were to count, in lieu of taxes, the Federal contribution on the basis that we now employ for impacted aid youngsters, federally financed housing. would that help your county to any degree? Mr. V~xHoosE. No. sir: not in my particular county. We do not have, to my imowledge. any Federal aid supported housing projects. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead, Mr. VanHoose.. Mr. VANH0OsE. Comprehensive planning for education is indeed a worthy objective. This type of planning goes on in Kentucky at both the local and State level. Title V of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. has resulted in improved resources at t.he Kentucky State Department of Education. The people in this department have shown in the past. that. they realize the value of planning, a.nd with the assistance of title V funds, have improved their resources t.hat can be applied to this need. To set up a special agency to deal with problems of educational planning when State departments of education are already staffed and involved in this very act.ivity makes for duplication of effort. It is possible that the purpose of this proposal could actually be defeated by it.s implementation as proposed in the amendment. Most. States have departments of education with resources and personnel necessary for comprehensive pla.nning, and can provide more value PAGENO="0175" EI~EMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 997 per dollar spent than a group newly assembled for this specific pur- pose. In fact, with the present shortage of professionals in this field, I would question in any State tha.t would compare favorably with resources already to be found in that State's department of education. It has been a privilege to appear before this committee. The school system I represent appreciates the opportunity to express to you our thoughts on the subject you are considering. Thank you for your kind attention. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much. Mr. DoDsoN. Our next witness is Dr. W. R. McNeill. STATEMENT OF W. IL McNEILL, SUPERINTENDENT, BOWLING GREEN INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS, BOWLING GREEN, KY. Mr. MCNEILL. Honorable Chairman and distinguished members of the 1-louse Education and Labor Committee, I wish t.o thank you sin- cerely for this opportunity of appearing before you in behalf of chil- dren in the Commonwealth of Kentucky and particularly in t.he city of Bowling Green, who have profited immensely from the fine effort on your part through the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. I have with me some exhibit material that I would like to pre- sent., material on our reading center, and material from our guidance division which is part of this act, and also a dropout study that is being carried on. May I at this time quote from comments the reading material center presented as they embarked upon their work, showing the deep sin- cerity of our appreciation. This marks the beginning of a new era in education. For all teachers this is an exciting and dreamed-of experience in our teaching career. Title I funds are providing new horizons for our economically, culturally, and educationally deprived students. The reading centers are one facet of this Federal program in which our staff members are seeking to provide equal opportunity to students through differential treatment without regard to race, creed, or national origin. Our purpose in this remedial reading project is to establish a program geared to the needs of the aforementioned students. May I say that we have as a result of these opportunities you have provided us been able to do t.hings that. we have wanted to do for so long, to probe the very depth, as you will find as we disc.uss the surveys we have made through the guidance division where we would talk with parent.s, we would bring parents in and talk with them about our problems, as we worked with the underprivileged children they would sit in our midst, they would talk with us and we would then develop programs that would meet the needs. We are approaching the very zenith of our desire to work toward the one to one ratio of individual- ized instruction. May I hasten to add that other areas beside title I are particularly beneficial because we have been benefactors from an area of title III where we have an individualized instruction program going in one of our schools that serves some 40 counties and about 50 school district.s in our area, where these people through the funds you have provided us, are visiting communities throughout the Nation and are bringing innovations that we are using to provide our children the opportunity to obtain this instruction on an individualized basis. PAGENO="0176" 998 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS We use team teaching to bring much in the way of an impact on the individual student through the various areas of specialists work- ing with the children in areas of, say, a specialist in math, science, language. arts, social studies, so that they can receive that individual- ized attention. I would like to support strongly points that my colleagues have listed here today such as the timing of the information and par- ticularly the appropriation in order that we may go about our planning more orderly and not have the crash programs that we sometimes experience. You asked the question, Mr. Chairman, of another person testify- ing here about securing the personnel. Sometimes, we do get some outside people hut most often we feel that we use our people from our own staff. We have fine people working with us, dedicated people who are intensely interested in children and in their educational op- portunities. We develop them. WTe are going to strive at every mo- ment not to deprive the other children in our community by depriving them of our resource here in Bowling Green because we have the Western Kentucky Fniversity. Of course we feel we are fortunate to have that. fine insthution to provide us with well-trained personnel who come in and work with us. Moving on, we do need funds for con- struction. As was pointed out by Dr. Vanlloose, you find that it is difficult to keep up with the popu1atioi~ explosion, providing class- rooms for this very fine program that we feel is being instituted, all over this land of ours. So. take a good look at the possibilities of pro- viding some funds whereby we may bring in needed fiscal facilities in order to assist us in this program. We heartily endorse the Head- start program. `We appreciated the President's message to Congress where he em- phasized that. Headstart was a basic approach and we feel that it. is quite true, we feel that. it should be, as has been brought. out here, per- haps a bit more school oriented. We want. the community. WThule we use the community at all times, if we. are not using the community we are losing a very vital resource. `We are going to involve the com- munity every way we can but as those youngsters come into school after getting a good start through Headstart then let us have it more school orie.nted so that that child will get. more of the same from Headstart instead of more of the same of the deprived conditions that we had, the deprivations that we have had in the past. I might also add another item, the restoration of funds under NDEA title III. `We think this is of extreme importance to assist. us in our regular program where w'e used the matching money to provide audio- visuals that are so important for our regular program as well as for title I program, title III program and of course we are very ap- preciative of the program in title II. I am of t.he opinion that perhaps we have not. been receiving the percentage on the administration, but I mentioned to a colleague., I suspect t.hat could very well have been totaled in with our total funds and then divided equitably be- twee.n us. I am just putting that in as a plug for that. Yes, your guidance for the use of the national average for per pupil expenditures we feel will benefit. us in Bowling Green and throughout the State of Kentucky, a.nd the use of the $3,000 income as the guide- PAGENO="0177" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS 999 line for the increase will also give us greater opportunities to J)rovide our children with these wonderful opportunities. I might add a footnote that I would like to know more about the distribution that you have had about the use of children in federally supported housing. I believe there is another member of our group that will be interested in this that might benefit from it. May I thank you for this opportunity of appearing before you on behalf of the children, the staff, the school board and the community of Bowling Green, Ky., for presenting my views before you at this time. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much, Mr. McNeill. Mr. DODSON. Mr. Chairman, we have one other superintendent remaining to testify and t.hen Mr. Watkins wants to make a brief statement. Our last superintendent is Leon Smith, superintendent of McCracken County schools down in Paducah. STATEMENT OF LEON T. SMITH, SUPERINTENDENT, McCRACKEN COUNTY SCHOOLS, PADUCAH, KY. Mr. SMITH. Congressman Perkins, members of the committee, it is certainly a privilege for me to come and appear before this com- mittee. I am Leon T. Smith, superintende.nt of schools in McCracken County, a county in the extreme western part of Kentucky. You have heard primarily from central and eastern Kentucky this morning. WTe are located in the heart of the Purcyase right near Kentucky and Barkeley Lakes. McCracken County had previously been an agri- cultural county until recent years. We are fast becoming urbanized and industrialized. We have some 6,000 children enrolled in 12 dif- ferent educational centers in McCracken County. All of our schools' have benefited greatly from the legislation that has been enacted at the natioiial level. \Ve have tried to take advantage of all the meas- iires that are applicable to our particular county. We are especially appreciative of title I because we feel that educa- tion has been greatly improved in McCracken County as a result of this measure. Some of the things that we have achieved as a result of this act are as follows: We have in McCracken Count.y a complete physical education program for all children in grades 1 through 12. This program is administered by properly certified and well-trained physical education teachers. 1i~Te are now in the process of completing plans for the initiation of a remedial reading program primarily designed to teach remedial reading mathematics. This too, of course, would be under the direction of properly trained and well-certified people. We have a complete library program in all elementary and secondary schools and as a result of title I we have an expanded guidance program at the junior high and high school levels. Also, under title III of the Elementary and Secondary Act we in western Kentucky, some 17 counties and 28 districts, have one of the most successful, I believe, programs for inservice training of teachers that is in existence in Kentucky and possibly in the Nation. In McCracken County we have organized curriculum study and research committees which are designed to study and improve our instructional program at all levels. We are studying different fields and have individuals at work in all of these particular fields 75-492---67-pt. 2-12 PAGENO="0178" 1000 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS I would like to refer to some of the other acts of legislation that are beneficial to us in McCracken County. The National Defense Educational Act which came early in our experience has been responsi- ble for helping provide much needed teachers aids and materials, and audiovisual aids and things of that nature. We feel that this has greatly improved the instructional program in McCracken County. We have endeavored in all instances to use all of our entitlement under this particular program. The Vocational Administration Act of 1963 has been of invaluable service to McCracken County. I have only one recommendation to make to this group: Several of my predecessors have mentioned several recommendations. We in McCracken County were faced with the apparent loss of our vocational education depart- inents in our three county schools. We were faced with that loss primarily because very few of our people were farm connected and our whole vocational educational program required that all of our students be farm connected. Some 31/2 years ago, McCracken County part.icipated in a pilot program in agricultural occupations and for 18 months we conducted that program with an idea of training agricul- tural youth to do something other than farming. Since the 18 months pilot program has been in existence we have been designated as demon- stration center in agricultural occupations. The purpose of this particular program is threefold: First, it is to prepare boys for effective job entry and advance. In agricultural businesses which sell agricultural supplies and services to farmers and others. Second. it. doe.s help many boys discover an interest in a par- ticular phase of the business of agriculture to move on to a specialized or technical training area vocational school or community college. Third. it does cause boys to develop a desire to go to college and to prepare themselves for professional careers in agriculture. I think we in McCracken County and Kentucky are doing a better job of educating our college-bound students, than we are those who are force.d to leave school and take a job in order to earn a livelihood. For that reason my recommendation is that this committee and my fellow educators should place more emphasis on the training of indi- viduals to earn a living. I am talking about those individuals who must begin to earn a living before they enter college or without college. The first year of the demonstration center in McCracken County, and, incidentally, this was located at Reidland High School, which was in the eastern part of McCracken County, are as follows: the Depart- ment of Vocational Agriculture at Reidland has successfully com- pleted 2 years as a demonstration center demonstrating a program which trains senior students of vocational agriculture in agricultural occupations. During these 2 years some 300 principals, board mem- bers, educators, superintendents, supervisors, and advisory committee members from 20 States in the Nation have visited this center or this demonstration center. The program at the center has recently been evaluated by out-of- State and in-State committees. It was evaluated first on the program and second on how well the program was being demonistrated to visi- tors. The center received commendable recommendations from both evaluating committees. The in-State committee was composed of su- perintendents, principals, and agricultural businessmen. The out-of- PAGENO="0179" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1001 State committee was composed of teachers and supervisors a.nd teachers of agriculture. Prior to becoming a demonstration center the depart- ment an 18-month pilot program which leads to employment in agri- cultural occupations. The present program at Reidland prepares senior students of vocational agriculture for employment in agricul- tural businesses tha.t sell services and equipment or feeds and seeds and fertilizers, agricultural chemicals and supplies. There is a systematic program of instruction, c]asswork is followed by supervised practices related to classroom instruction. The pro- gram runs through an entire school year and includes the following units: Opportunities in agricultural occupations; orientation to the train- ing program; organization of distributive businesses; agricultural mathematics; human relations; personality traits; salesmanship and selling; merchandizing in the fields of feed, seeds and fertilizers and agricultural chemicals. The class instruction includes Problem solving, demonstration, con- structing displays, role playing, rehearsing, and use of resource people. Each boy is placed in an agricultural supply business for a minimum of 200 hours of supervised practice during the school ye.ar. Reidland High School has a three-teacher department of vocational agriculture. There is a 4-year program of instruction at the. high school level and an out-of-school program for young and adult farmers. Freshmen agriculturists composed of crops, horticulture, soils in relation to crops. The sophomores study farm animals, including selecting, feeding, and breeding. The juniors study soils, including land use, physical properties, chemical properties, using soil-building materials, landscaping, and horticulture. The seniors have farm man- agement, agricultural occupations, and so forth. In each of the regular 4 years of vocational agriculture, have had agricultural mechanics and supervising farming as a part of the instructional part of the pro- gram. The out-of-school programing for the young adult farmers varies from year to year based on the needs of the group. The de- partment has a small greenhouse which is used in connection with class- work with freshmen and juniors in crops and horticulture. Two teachers handle the first 3 years of agriculture. One teacher directs the program of agricultural occupations at Reidland and coordinates the placement of sutdents for supervised practices in agricultural busi- nesses in the city and the couiity. In addition to the agricultural od cupational class at Reidland, two other high schools in McCracken County have programs in agricultural occupations. One is in voca- tional horticulture. The other is in agricultural mechanics. The di- rector of this program is Mr. Clayton Reilly, who serves as coordina- tor of all programs in the county. We believe that we have revolu- tionized the teaching of vocational agriculture not only in Kentucky but in the United States and will enable boys to learn to serve in dif- ferent capacities that they otherwise would not have had the opportu- nity to serve in. Since we live as close to Kentucky and Barkeley Lake as we do- Chairman PERKINS. In order to expedite, let me suggest that the rest of that statement be inserted in the record, Mr. Smith. We are going to have to recess here in 15 minutes for a quorum. If you would c~~p to summarize- PAGENO="0180" 1002 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. SMITH. I have just one more minute and then I will be through.. Since we live as close to Kentucky and Barkeley Lake as we do, it is a serious matter if your lawnmower or your cultivator won't start, but if your motorboat won't start, it is a calamity. Thank you, sir. I have appreciated the opportunity of appearing before you. Chairman PERKINS. We appreciate your coming. Mr. DODSON. Mr. Sam Watkins, whom I introduced a while ago, is a representative from Kentucky. He is on the educat.ion committee and several other committees which I won't take the time to mention, but he. wants about 2 minutes. Chairman PERKINS. Please come around. STATEMEMT OF HON. SAM WATKflIS, MEMBER OF THE LEGISLA- TURE, STATE OF KENTUCKY Mr. WATKINS. Honorable Chairman, honorable members of the committee, I want to thank you for giving me just a minute to make just a brief statement regarding some of the hearings that have been brought out today, especially in regard to the Kentucky Department of Education taking over the school system at Fort Knox. The attorney general of Kentucky has ruled that it would be un- lawful for the department to take over these schools under the present statutes and it is iiecessarv to charge them. Of course I cant speak for the Kentucky House of Representatives or the Kentucky Legis- lature as to what they will do but being a battle-scarred member of that honorable body, I think I can point out that it would be impos- sible to get such a law changed inasmuch as there are only about five members of the house that would be affected in this area around Fort Knox and Fort Campbell. Chairman PERKINS. Let me ask you at tha.t point: Assuming that the law- was changed, you had favorable ruling from the attorney gen- eral, how much money would Hardin County then lose to the area as a result of the change, if any? Mr. WATKINS. In the two forts t.here are approximately 10,000 cliii- dren involved. It is estimated about $2 million wouki have to be brought from some other source or would have to be deducted from our general fund. Chairman PERKINS. Here is the point: I think you have missed the point. Public Laws 815 and 874 cited by Mr. Burkhead was added in order to encourage the education of federally connected children in local community schools rather than in federally operated home base schools. This, as you recall, was the basic philosophy behind Public Laws 815 and 874 originally, get the Army in particularly and the Government in general out of the business of running schools. That is what we were trying to do last year, trying to get the Government and the Army out of the business of running schools. Now if Frank- fort agreed to participate in financing of education of these young- sters on the theory that there is economic benefit. to the State by virtue of Fort. Knox. I am of the opinion that. the problem would be resolved. However, none of us is infallible and I have already directed the staff to check with the Office of Education and if Frankfort did participate, PAGENO="0181" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTCATION AMENDMENTS 1003 assuming that they did, to find out whether there. would still be any loss. It can be done, in my judgment, under a. ruling of the attorney generaL I don't want t.o take issue with my friend on the history of 813 and 814. I am just as anxious as you are to see. that the States, the State of Kentucky e.spe~ial1y, does not suffer any loss, especially in the Fort Knox area, by reason of this amendment.. I don't know of any reason why we cannot remove the amendment. I think the committee will go along. But the basic purpose which I say you missed was to get. the schools, was to get the Army and the Government in general out of the business of running the schools. That is what we have tried to do all through the years. Mr. W~ATKINS. Mr. Chairman, that is welcome news, that. the U.S. Office of Education, would like to get out of the. business of operating schools. I might. say, sir, that that would be welcome news from othe.r departments of Governmeiit, also, getting out of the business of being in business. To answer your question, sir, I am told that the money that is allo- cateci t.o these posts under title VI of Public Law 814 would adequately take c.are of the problem but as far as raising the money locally, on a local level, which I am sure would be desirable, I would like, to point out, sir, that we get approximately $45 million from 1 percent. of our 3 percent. retail sales tax and that could not be. collected at. the PX. Chairman PERKINS. We well understand that. We have gone over that hundreds and hundreds of times. Mr. WATKINS. Where would we get. our money? May I direct a quest ion to the. Chair? The department of education in Kentucky without. Federal help in operating the schools would find it impossible. Chairman PERKINS. No one in the impacted area legislation area has supported it more strongly than I have. I helped write the legis- lation. I think we protected the legislation when it was under all kinds of attacks throughout. the ye.ars. We intend to do it this time. I dont think we have any argument. here.. I think you are trying to argue over nothing. Mr. WATKINS. Mr. Chairman, you feel that the Attorney General has authority to say-that is something I don't have anything to do with, or know- anything about. If we knew what money is available to us I would know- what. kind of bill of goods I would have, to sell to my colleagues in the house of representatives. Chairman PERKINS. I am sure your particular area does not benefit very much from the impact.ed area legislation. The grea.t impact has been around the Fort. Knox area. I can appreciate the loss of revenue. This committee certainly, even though it. is one district in the country, I don't. think would stand for a tremendous burden on any one school district if our State laws did not conform. I think we can iron out this problem without any difficulty. Mr. BURKHEAD. Mr. Chairman, may I make a brief statement? Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Mr. BtRKIEAD. We are agreed with the principle that. the Federal Government should not operate t.he. schools but we do not want to be caught with the school system not, having sufficient. funds to operate when there is no ~ouree to get. it from. That is our problem. PAGENO="0182" 1004 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Chairman PERKINS. I understand your problem. Now assuming that you had a favorable ruling from the Attorney General, I don't have the figures before me, how much money would you lose, if any? Mr. B~RKHEAD. We would not lose any. We would be happy to operate the schools on the base. Chairman PERKINS. That is what I am trying to get. Mr. BFRKHEAD. That is what I have, been working on with the attorney general. He has called the. attorney general down in Georgia to find out what kind of ruling he made to take care of Georgia. He did that last week. Chairman PERKINS. That. took place last. week? Mr. B~RKTn~~D. ~1es. Chairman PERKINS. You know that as good as we have been all through the year-4 with these education agencies we do not intend t.o let. any school district. suffer. i~lr. BFRKIIEAD. We don't want to be the forgotten district. Chairman PERKINS. I don't think you are. You see, the theory that we operate(l tinder here was trying to get the Government out of business. Mr. BFRKIIEAD. I can agree with that. Chairman PERKINS. That has been the principle throughout the years. Mr. BtRKHEAD. But come June 30, 1968- Chairman PERKINS. I am very confident. that your school district will not suffer too much. I think you ought to go ahead and press for this ruling anyway since this is the only one in t.he whole country that we have this demand on since we are heading in the direction of getting the Federal Government and particularly the Department of the Army out of the business of running the schools. Mr. BFRKHEAD. There are the States, the Carolinas and Tennessee and Georgia at. present. who think they have their problem solved. Maybe. one or two others. Chairman PERKIN~. Yes. Let me compliment you. Mr. Burkhead. All through the years you have come up here and helped us write the impacted legislation. We appreciate your int.erest. We know just what it means to that area. When I get around the Fort Knox area, especially in your county, and see those nice school buildings, I like to think that I have, had a part in it, especially when I viSited that area. in 1949 when we first wrote these laws. Why don't we recess and come. back here at 2 o'clock. Mr. DoDsox. Mr. Chairman, we are all finished with our Kentucky delegation. Chairman PERKINS. I know, but there may be some questions. Try to come back. (Whereupon, at 12 :45 p.m., the hearing was recessed, t.o reconvene at 2 p.m. the same day.) AFTERNOON SESSION (The committee reconvened at 2 p.m., Hon. Carl D. Perkins, chair- man, presiding.) Chairman PERKINS. Gentlemen, I am impressed with the word that you superintendents have brought to the Congress from all see- PAGENO="0183" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1005 tions of Kentucky. Of course I am more familiar with eastern Kentucky. I never anticipated that the hearings today would produce a general report throughout Kentucky from all sections. I certainly wish to compliment Dr. Dodson for inviting to Washington all of you distinguished educators. I think we have a longS ways to go yet. WTe are making some progress. If I were to project rnto the future, I feel that we will sooner or later expand in another direction from the categorical approach, general Federal aid will actually be- come a reality. I do not mean to imply that the categorical approach has not been effective. In fact, I feel it has been most effective because we are zeroing in on the areas where we have the so-called educationally de- prived child, and it is in those areas that you need the assistance greater than any other area. We cannot overlook this fact.. It is go- ing to take us some time to come up with the ways and means and the type of programs that will best serve t.hese disadvantaged areas. To my way of thinking today, I feel that the funds we now have, from the evidence that I have he.ard, the funding iS not sufficient for our programing purposes and at the same time our school construc- tion program which is just as much a need perhaps as t.he program- ing for the disadvantaged sec.tions of the country. I would like to ask you a question. I know very little funds have been expended for school construction. I would like to ask you gentle- men, considering the way that. the program is being funded at the present. time., t.he present, level of funding, do you know of any better w-ay to spend the money a.nd make use of it to see that the needy areas of the country receive the greatest benefits than the way you are ex- pending funds for it at t.he present time? That is my question. I would like to hea.r your comment.. Mr. BURKHEAD. I brought out in my testimony this morning that large school districts we.re disadvantaged in that they had to select the schools either on a numbers basis or on a percent.age basis. That. cuts out a gre.a.t percentage of our economically handicapped children. What can be done about t.hat I don't know. Chairman PERKINS. That is an administrative point. Mr. BURKHEAD. According to t.he guidelines we have no choice about. it.. Chairman PERXINS. Go ahead, Doctor. Mr. MCNEILL. I feel very strongly about. the need for assistance in constructing new classrooms in order to house these programs. I might give an example in my own instance and maybe Mr. Dodson can give some examples from the st.atewide need. We feel strongly about the He.adst.art program. It is fine. They did a fine job for our youngsters. But our schools are so crowded. By the way, we have a campaign right, now to help ourselves by build- ing a new high school in Bowling. I think the people. of Bowling are going t.o do that. But we have not had the Headstart program throughout the year for the reason we have no place to put it.. Our classrooms are hUed, and we had no place to put the Headstart pro- gram. So we a.re having a full-blown program during the summer. Then we are losing that during the remainder of the year. I would like to give that example as the need for classroom construction. PAGENO="0184" 1006 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Chairman PERKINS. I agree with that statement. You know, be- fore we came forth with the categorical approach, we were doing very little toward assisting the disadvantaged child in the country. Do you feel that we have zeroed in in the right areas with the funds that we are expending? Mr. MCNEILL. We are doing things now `that we have wanted to do for years and felt that we could not deprive one part of the community a~ the expense of the other. We feel that by zeroing in, as you have just said, that you have given us this opportunity to-well, the Head- start is such a good example. Take the youngster in his formative years and emphasize some ex- periellces. and we. would like to, and others are doing it, they are able to carvv it. through the years and we would like to follow it on through, when they are second graders and third graders, see to it. that. they have the experience that other children get normally but they don't. Chairman PERKTNS. That is why I emphasize the categorical approach. Mr. X0E. Mr. Chairman, you were asking about categorical aid against general aid, and all that has been said certainly is correct, fhat we have been able to do lots of things that. we couldn't have done otherwise. Chairman PERKINS. The reason of course, Mr. Noe, we did not. come forth with the general bill is that. I advocated the general aid approach for 20 years but we. just could not get. to first. base.. Finally we came along with the categorical approach. I am wondering if we. are reaching those. areas of greatest. need and serving those youngsters that are in greatest. need under this cate- gorical approach. That. is my question. Mr. NOE. You are reaching a. lot. At. the same time it. does handi- Cap us when trying to operate a total school system. For instance, you do nothing for teachers' salaries. Staffing is a gre.a.t problem for many of us. Staffing in these areas is even a greater problem. Chairman PERKINS. Yes. In youi~ cit.ies you manage to pay teachers salaries for the special education programs. Mr. NoE. Yes: we do some of that. You see, if we are not, careful, the areas that in the past. have been the so-called privileged areas could become the underprivileged areas. Chairman PERKINS. I agree with von wholeheartedly. Mr. N0E. Take this as one example. Because we had to operate an austerity program for the past decade, we cut out. kindergarten. Louisville was one of t.he first cities in the country to pioneer kinder- garten education, hut we had to abandon it. When we got. the aid, we said we would reestablish kindergartens in the area of greatest need. Because of that., then we took care of kindergartens for about half of our children, but. the other half we couldn't get. We got some money, and we said, well, because we are getting Fed- eral aid, half of it, we can find the money to operate t.he other half. But. then OEO immediately came along, the local group, and said, "Oh, no. if you are going t.o operate a kindergarten program up here in your so-called affluent neighborhood and pay for it, then you pay for it down here.." So we lost. our kindergarten program. PAGENO="0185" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1007 We compromised with them one year, but the next year we had to pick up the whole program. So it can be a handicap. We can have library services. Chairman PERKINS. I appreciate this splendid report which shows so much progress in your cit.y, t.hat you have made especially under title I. Are there any other comments? Mr. VanHoose, do you care to comment on the question? Mr. VANHOOSE. Mr. Perkins I have only one point in response to your question: Is there any way or is there some suggestion regarding a better way to aid from this Federal standpoint.? In regard t.o the larger school areas like Louisville and Jefferson Count.y, we are often confronted with the fact. that because of the big- ness of our area and the good hospitals and good medical facilities and other things that go along in a communit.y of this size and are possible because of the size of the community, this in itself attracts certain people to our community for certain services. In attract.ing people to our community, we naturally then develop cert.ain problems because of their coming, and there is a little bit of an imbalance as far as children are concerned. Special education, for example, would be an example. We have probably a much higher percentage of children who need special education than would a normal community, we will say. When I use the word "normal," you understand what I mean. For this reason I am wondering if the Congress could not give some con- sideration to Federal programing that would look into a particular area from the standpoint, of special need based upon conditions that would not fit int.o a normal category that the Congress would develop. ChaIrman PERKINS. Do you feel that you do riot have the. flexibility to do just what you are talking about under this act at the present time? Mr. VANTIOOSE. Yes, I think this would be applicable under special' needs so far as physical deficiencies, mental defi'cienc.ie.s of children. We have in our community a number of children who have come to town or their parents have come to town because of some help for those who a.re perceptionally handicapped. We are operating eight perce.pt.ionally handicapped classes. There are not more than a half dozen scat.tered around the State. This has attracted a few people in our community who have chil- dren who have perceptional handicaps, feeling that. they can get service in our community. We do not, have any particular way to receive additional help on these children. It is recommended that you only have four per tea.c.her or e.ight as a maximum. So you can see this puts a tremendous load on the school system that tries to branch off a.nd serve these children that are in very great need. Another instance might be the present programing provides for reading of readiness help for those who are in the poverty category. Well, there are great numbers of children who are not in the poverty category who need this same help and assistance. Maybe this illustrates the kind of thing I believe you might con- side.r in expanding the Federal aid program. PAGENO="0186" 1008 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMEND~NTS chairman PERKINS. Mr. Scherle? Mr. SCHERLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would first of all like to tell you gentlemen that I have spent many fine times in your great State of Kentucky both in Louisville and also in Paducah. In fact, I treasure your countryside and particularly your fast horses. This morning I had a very unique opportunity to be invited to the White House with other members of this committee and to witness a new motion picture called "Pancho," which is based primarily on the Headstart program. Now there has been consideration that the Headst.art program should probably be changed from the OEO to the educational part. Would you gentlemen like to comment on that? Chairman PERKINS. Before you start, I think I ought to apologize for many members of the committee this morning, the minority and the majority. All of us were invited to the `White House, but I felt that I should not go because of you gentlemen. I noticed about every- body else went. Mr. SCHERLE. We missed you, Mr. Chairman, but we ~iew also that your duties were here. But I am very much interested in the remarks from you as educators as to whether you think the Headstart program should be allowed to stay in the OEO or do you think because of educational funda- mentals it should be transferred to the educational field-perhaps the State board of public instruction? Mr. BURKHEAD. At a recent meeting of all the administrators in Kentucky, back in December, we passed a resolution to the effect that we felt that all programs relative to education should be administered through the U.S. Office of Educat.ion. Mr. NOE. I would say that, Mr. Scherle, too. Basically, it is an educational program. You have a board of education in a community concerned with the problems of education. This doesn't mean that you are not interested in all the resource personnel that is in the community to work with you and to help you. Also, as far as we are concerned, it is not saying that we are not working very harmoniously and effectively with our local community action group. There was one conflict earlier that we talked about this morning. There was a directive that our community action commit- tee had said that we must take the recommendations of these commu- nity groups. We pointed out that there was a conflict there with our State law. Apparently that one has been resolved. So, there is no real clash that we have in this. We just think it is good school administration to keep all of your school programs channeled through official educational administration channels and procedures. Mr. SCHERLE. Do you think, also, that if this is changed that along with the educational facilities for the youngsters you will also be in a position financially to look after their medical needs as youngsters just commencing their educational process? Mr. NOE. I don't know what is the practice in the other communities throughout the country. hut with us the Louisville and Jefferson County Medical Department is responsible for the health of young- sters. So, we work with them. We do not have our own doctors and PAGENO="0187" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1009 nurses as such in our school system. So we have always had that ar- rangement and that understanding and there has been no conflict of interest there. They work in the schools, through the schools, and with us. Mr. SCHERLE. Perhaps I did not phrase my question correctly. First of all, do you have kindergarten in Kentucky? Mr. NOE. In some places, yes; we do, in Louisville. I would say in the majority of the school districts in Kentucky they do not. Mr. SCHERLE. Your starting age for kindergarten is what? Mr. NOE. Five. Mr. SCHERLE. At what age would you recommend that Headstart commence? Mr. NoE. If we didn't have kindergarten, we would recommend 5, and that is what has happened in Kentucky. Primarily the Headstart programs have been for 5-year-olds. We have to get the kindergarten programs going before we can get back to the nursery school. So if you are asking, then I would move it back a year. Mr. SCHERLE. This is a good question because I understand from some of the conversation I overheard this morning they are recom- mending age 3. Mr. NoR. Yes. I think there have been some studies. The Univer- sity of Chicago a number of years ago pointed out that if they could get children 3 years old and had a controlled group, that they showed there was a distinct advantage. Mr. SCHERLE. What would be their capacity of absorbing the knowl- edge necessary at that young, tender age for, say, exposure to summer classes of 6 weeks in regard to letting them become a little bit more mature, we will say, at age 5 in regard to going out and having more of a continuity in their educational process? Mr. NOE. You are not talking to an authority on early childhood education, but my answer would be that we think it is all to the good, that there should be followup and there should be continuity just as we see if you are moving into a headstart program for the 4- or 5-year- olds, you suddenly can't cut it off at the first grade. Mr. SCHERLE. But if you start at 3, this is only a summer course; is it not, Headstart, more or less? Mr. N0E. Yes, we are starting at 4. Mr. SCHERLE. Let us say it is recommended at 3, would the tender age of 3 still make them mature enough that it would be advantageous to continue this program and then have them that much father ad- vanced at 5 or would you gain just as much starting them at the year of 5 in kindergarten? This is my question. Mr. NOE. As I told you earlier, I can't answer as an expert in early childhood education. My best judgment would be that it would be advantageous. Mr. SCHERLE. Not just as professional babysitters. Mr. NOE. That is correct. Mr. SCHERLE. This is the thing I would like to stay away from. Mr. NOE. I would, too, and I think all people in education would not want that. If we didn't think there were values in working with 3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds, I don't think that we would be particularly interested in promoting a program. PAGENO="0188" 1010 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. MCNEILL. Particularly in this type of child. They get exper- iences-I don't know about the 3 and 4-I would want to think that through, and I think others will, too. I think that. is what makes Head- start so advantageous. Those youngsters get experience they don't get at home. We maintain that running the Headstart program for the 4-year-old if it is a summer program, they will still get experiences on field trips, contact, living together that you won't get at home, be- cause they don't have that supervision. As far as just professional babysitting, I think we would all object to that.. Mr. VANHO05E. When I mentioned a moment ago the need for those children who may have special difficulties, if you went back to the age of 3, this would, I think, be even better for those youngsters because the sooner you can get. at resolving some deficiency that a child has,, the quicker you can get him back into the flow of normal schooling. If we could have children at t.he age of 3 receiving special instruction,. or these neurologically impaired youngsters receiving the kind of spe- cial training that is necessary in order to overcome this mental block that they have, this would he an extremely important thing for us and would be e.ve.n in the beginning outside of the realm of professional babysitting. Mr. SCITERLE. Do you have Teachers Corps? Mr. NOE. 1es. Mr. SCHERLE. Do you find the results pretty highly beneficial? Mr. ~OE. I made me.ntion in my prepared statement about it, Mr. Chairman. We have two units that we established this year. We think it is all to the good. We are well pleased with the progress that these interns are making. We think that it is a source of gaining some additional teachers. Staffing in the inner-city has been a par- ticularly hard problem for us. Mr. SCHERLE. You do not find any conflict then between your normal teachers and those who are receiving additional help and benefits to teach in the underprivileged areas? Mr. NOE. We have not vet, This is a new program for us. These' are. considered intern people. In the. main I suppose they are taking positions that otherwise would have been filled by substitute teachers or people who were not qualified. When you have these supervisors working as closely with them as you do under this program, we think it has been a source of great help to us. Mr. SCITERLE. In the field of OEO and that part of poverty that is connected with education is there any conflict between what they are doing, any duplication or overlapping in regard to the jurisdiction held by a State department of public instruction? Mr. NOE. We have a State department. man here, but as far as one school system is concerned, no. We have representation on our local community action group which I am referring to as the. OEO group. We work with them. We started early with the community action program. The only regret we have is that we lost some funds and we had to cut out some programs this year. Mr. SCHERLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, gentlemen. Chairman PERKINS. Especially in the inner-city areas where you have so many disadvantaged youngsters, to what extent. do you need PAGENO="0189" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1011 school construction to serve the most disadvantaged areas and to what extent are you unable to furnish those buildings with your total State resources? Mr. NOE. Mr. Chairman, Louisville has bee.n rather fortunate in that it. has never lost, a tax campaign for capital construction. We haven't, won one for current operation for some time. We have been in one position. Mr. \Ta.nHoose in Jefferson County has been in another position. You see, the growth in our area has been outside of the school district because our boundaries are frozen and the county has caught the tremendous impact on pupil explosion. So, while we have had modest increases right, along, our building needs have been to replace older buildings. In the past 6 years we have been able to spend about $45 million for school construction. We still have a lot, to do. As we move int.o kindergarten programs and a.s we move into nursery scho6l programs, we will need additional facilities and we are now scraping t.he bottom of the barrel, and we still have unmet needs. So, money for capital outlay purposes certainly could be of tre- mendous assistance to us. We have had t.o let maintenance, go, for instance, t.hat should have been taken care of because we just. didn't have the money and operating budget to do it.. So this has been a real problem for us. There is still much for us to do. Chairman PERKINS. In your planning stage, wha.t. will be your unmet needs 5 years from now? Mr. NoE. At the rate we are going our unmet needs will be for a program, No. 1; additional facilities, No. 2. Chairman PERKINS. How about your situation, Richard? I was impressed with the county. You have multiplied there 300 percent since you have come to Washington in 10 or 12 years. Mr. VANHOOSE. Yes. Mr. Perkins, in t.he next 5 years, if the present trend continues, our population will pass a hundred thousand pupils. Our building needs will be nearly $40 million. We dedicated six new buildings this year in an effort to stay ahead of this and are down now to only 8,000 children on double sessions from 21,000. Chairman PERKINS. How many children on double sessions now in Jefferson Co~mty? Mr. VANHOOSE. About 8,000. Chairman PERKINS. About 8,000? Mr. VANHOOSE. Yes. It was 21,000, but we ha.v~ been able to pull this number down in the last couple of years. Hopefully next year we can reduce t.his number considerably more. We now have under construction six or seven more buildings that we hope to dedicate or have ready for dedication for t.he opening of school in the fall of 1967. We are currently experiencing an unusual growt.h pattern in our community. The Catholic schools are discontinuing first grades. So we are picking up about 2~00 additional first-graders next year for the first time. The city is picking up around 1,500. This, together with our normal growth, means that. we. will have. about 11,000 in our first grades this next year. We. will need an additional 100 first-grade teachers lust. to take care of this transfer of first grades from the Catholic school system to our PAGENO="0190" 1012 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMEI~TS public school system. `We are working on this. We have had a num- ber of conferences with the Catholic school board and their representa- tives and have made some progress. However, the problem of employ- ing 100 or thereabouts new teachers in our system is going to be a very formidable task. Our normal growth requires about 200 teachers additional each year. Then with our turnover we are looking for between 500 and 800 teach- ers next fall. You can see our building needs are reflected also in our teacher need. I think our biggest problem, being somewhat different from Mr. Xoes, is that of growth and development. In addition to these special building needs, we need buildings just to keep up with the rapid explosion of population. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. McNeill, in the Bowling Green area, what is your building situation? Are you lagging? Mr. MCNEILL. We are lagging on school construction. As I say, we are going for a capital outlay program which we hope will be sup- ported. I am somewhat in the position of Mr. Noe in that we are in an independent district which has this perimeter, outside of whic.h, the suburban areas, is where the greatest growth will come, in WTarren County. I understand that they have a building program underway. Again they will have the need for classrooms just the same as everyone else. Chairman PERKINS. What about your extreme west? Mr. Smith, are you able to fulfill your building needs, or are you lagging behind? Mr. SMITH. We are gradually lagging behind. We made quite an effort to expand our physical facilities and have done so. In the last 10 years we have spent in excess of $7 million in capital construction. We are not nearly as large as Mr. Vanhoose, of Jefferson County. However, we are experiencing a 6- to 8-percent growth. Each year which requires an additional half million or a million dollars every 3 to 5 years. We have about exhausted our borrowing power. We have spent all the 815 money and what-not that we could get, so we are beginning to have growing pains as far as building is concerned. Chairman PERKINS. Let me ask this question of you and Mr. Dodson. I am wondering just how much further you can go under your present resources at the State and local level toward fulfilling the program needs at the elementary and secondary level in Kentucky? Mr. DODSON. Well, we can't go a lot further, Mr. Chairman. We are asking the legislature this time for an appropriation, but this will in no way meet the needs that are current. For example, I gave I think in my testimony, and this is the result of a recent survey of buildings and related facilities, there is a need presently of about $143 million. Of course, we can't start to touch that on our present setup in Ken- tucky. We haven't ha.d any increased appropriation from the State level since 1960. We are asking for one this time, but this will not do t.he things these people are talking about all over the State. This building need, as I get it, is pretty general everywhere, especially in the areas where they are growing. Many of the boards of education are up to their bonding capacity. They are hemmed in by statutory tax limitation which keeps them from raising any more revenue locally and it is getting to be a serious probleni everywhere. PAGENO="0191" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1013 Chairman PERKINS. Assuming we were able to enact a construction bill before we ever got to the point that we were able to get a general aid fund through the Congress, in that event, would you feel that you should make the needs applicable to the disadvantaged areas just like we zeroed in on the disadvantaged areas for our programing purposes? Mr. DODSON. You mean make them applicable t.o the disadvantaged areas only? Chairman PERKINS. Yes; if we only could make a start on the school construction bill. Mr. DODSON. I think it might be a start; yes. This might be a way of getting your foot in the door. Chairman PERKINS. Do you feel that would be the best approach to a start? Mr. DODSON. Yes. Chairman PERKINS. How about you, Mr. Noe? Mr. NOE. Yes; I think that is correct. It could be very helpful. Always, as you know, with a rapid growth on the periphery that you have children there and you have no housing and by necessity you have to go there with your housing first and that leaves the older buildings that you have in the central city, you see, just staying there for that much longer time. They are the ones really where you ought to have your best programs and often your facilities are such that you can't have as good a program as you can where you have modern facilities. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Scherle? Mr. SCHERLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have one or two questions. It has always been a question in my mind in regard to audiovisual aids. How many of you now have ETV in your schools? Mr. NOE. We have. Mr. VANHOOSE. We have. Mr. SCHERLE. About half or a third? Mr. DoDsoN. Mr. Vanhoose has done as much with ETV as any- body else in the State. Mr. SCHERLE. This field intrigues me particularly since it is so cur- rent.. Can you compare for me audio visual aids in regard to ETV in your classrooms? Do you prefer one over the other, or what are the benefits of one over the other? Mr. MONEILL. I think you need them to supplement each other. Mr. SCHERLE. They complement one another? Mr. MCNEILL. Yes. Mr. SCHERLE. I not.iced in going through here that many of you recommend audiovisual, but in no sense of the word have I seen any ETV. Mr. N0E. I think Mr. VanHoose might tell you what our plans are in Kentucky which may account for that. Mr. VANHOOSE. Kentucky has an educational television authority now and we are in the process of implementing an educational tele- vision program that will be free to each child and each school in our State. We will have eventually 12 transmitters about our State. These 12 transmitters presumably will blanket our entire pupil popu- lation, our entire State. Hopefully our programing will be designed t.o provide for the kind of instruction that will do the most good PAGENO="0192" 1014 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS throughout the State. I am not in a position to say what instruction that will be. That very definitely belongs to our department of educa- tion and has not as yet been established, the exact program that we will view. We do believe that educational television is another tool just like the motion picture is a tool or the overhead projec.tor is a tool. Any- thing that the teacher may utilize to help her become more effective is a tool. We. would place television perhaps as one of t.he better tools be- cause of the opportunity here to concentrate on quality of programing that might. come out from the studio, not. meaning that this master teacher would be the teacher, but this master teacher, so to speak, would become the great. aid and assistant to an equally strong and masterful teacher in the classroom, this teacher on camera presumably having the time to great research and go into programing in great. depth, may- be do things that a teacher with 25 or 30 youngsters continually with him could not do. In this way the. teacher not. only would have the opportunity of a good lesson for the youngster, but also an opportunity to see good teaching and to have the opportunity to grow from what they would learn from this very outstan ding on-camera teacher. I think in addition to this you get immediacy that. the television can bring to your classroom that the film does not make possible. I suppose we could go on and on. There is redeployment of teachers made possible t.hrough television by virtue of the fact that sometimes television can go to a large group of youngsters at one. time, bringing uniformity of inst.ruction where this would help the programing and then diversification can come later. I think this is a great tool. I do feel that educators are tremendously interested in seeing this developed so that it may be the best tool of all that we have ever had in our classrooms. Mr. ScIIERLE. Thank you very much. In our family we have two teachers, so this has been quite an im- portant thing as far as I am concerned. Mr. VANHOOSE. We have certainly passed the day when we are worrying about this displacing the teacher. Mr. SCHERLE. I realize that ETV would be a poor substitute for a teacher, but from what I am told they definitely serve a real purpose in diversity and also, as you say, a redeployment. I think this is fine. Mr. \`ANHOOSE. And immediacy. Mr. SCHERLE. And immediacy. I have one more question. In your State of Kentucky, you have parochial schools, I know this. Do you bus your children? Do you furnish the transportation for the children of parochial schools? Mr. V~~xl-1oosr. Yes, sir, we do. Our St.ate law provides that a school board may transport a youngster, a Catholic school youngster, providing the fiscal court pays for it. So far as I know, every fiscal court in our State does pay for the service. WTe are. transporting all the parochial youngsters in our district who request it.. And the fiscal court pays for this. Mr. SCTIERLE. Do you also afford opportunity for those in parochial as well as public schools to exchange specific courses? PAGENO="0193" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1015 Mr. \AXHOOSE. In our particular school system we have never been requested to (10 this. No. ~, it would be very difficult in our par- ticular case because of this rapidly expanding situation that we have. We. have on just one or two occasions an interchange on driver educa- t ion courses. Mr. SCHERLE. But this is all? No specific educational courses? Mr. V~~xHoosr. No. Mr. NOE. The only thing that I could add to that would be that in the city of Louisville we share all athletic facilities with the parochial schools, exactly on the same basis as they are used by our own schools. In other words, there is a charge to our own school for just out-of-pocket expenses, and the parochial schools use the foot- ball stadium and the gymnasium exactly on the same basis. Mr. SCHERLE. Do you share your winning coaches, too? Mr. NoR. Winning coaches? No, sir, but in discussing this inter- change you were talking about on a half and half basis, we were willing and we were prepared to do this about a year ago when the parochial school officials found that it could not work for them. We were going to let them go to our trade school a half a day. We said if we are going to share on half and half, who is going to get t.he star halfback? Mr. SCHERLE. In our particular school system we do have some shared time instruction in special areas. We have instrumental music and the parochial children do come to the public schools to get instru- mental music instruction. We also have parochia.l children coming to our high school to get physics and art.. There are special classes which we have not. been able in the past to provide, and they do come to our schools to get that type of instruction. We think it is legal. Mr. BAKER. In our schools everything is on an open basis, it is share alike, for those for whom the invitation is there. In the event of any utilization of facilities, materials, audiovisuals, whatever, the pa- rocliial schools are the same recipients and same users as the other. The parochial school in our school district is small, there is only one, they share our library facilities. They do not have any. The ele- mentary and junior high grades, they come in for remedial reading classes or physical education if they are involved in intramural or junior high athletics, complete utilization without any form of ques- tion or restriction or what-have-you involved. Mr. ScIIEIILE. I would like to ask another question. I believe this gentleman here mentioned the fact that the parochial schools dropped the first grade, is that right? Mr. VANH00sE. That is correct. Mr. SCHERLE. There is one question that intrigues me. Perhaps von gentlemen would like to dwell on it. Was this primarily because of finances? Mr. VANHOOSE. I believe that is correct.. Monsignor Pitt. told me that the Catholic order that provided the teachers had to withdra.w the teachers. I presume. this was partly because of their inability to finance properly, and T think possibly, purti because of the great. need that. might. be developing elsewhere. I am not sure that I am answering that. correctly. Mr. SCTTERLE. My question is this: What do you gentlemen as edu- cators contemplate to be the future of the parochial school that is now 7~--492--(i7-pt. 2-13 PAGENO="0194" 1016 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS financed privately with the cost of education soaring to such phenom- enal heights? Mr. i~OE. I think that you had a report from the national Catholic organization, Father Hesburgh from Notre Dame, and that group, in which, if I understand correctly, they are thinking in terms of a policy of retrenchment., that they would eliminate some of their colleges and part of their elementary school program to give greater concentration and to work for quality education at the secondary level, which~ I think, if I understand correctly, is a change from the previous position when they wanted to stay with the elementary schools. As I understand it., it is a matter of cost with them as it was in Cincinnati, that over half of their teachers were lay teachers and the competition sala.rywise is such that it was making it exceedingly hard for the parishes. Mr. SCIIERLE. Don't you fe.el in the future that you will see fewer and fewer parochial schools because of the fantastic cost involved in operating these on a private basis and almost complete abolition of your elementary grades as time goes on? Mr. NOE. I am not prepared to answer that one. We have been try- ing to find out if they are going to drop the second grade and the third grade, von see, but they say not, that they think by doing this that they can hold the line. For how long I don't know. But if they are going to do this, this just makes the question that your chairman asked us a little while ago about facilities more important. Even next year we are going to have to use some of their facilities to take care of the first. grade. So, we will be renting some parochial facilities to house some public school first graders. Mr. \ANHOO~E. Mr. Scherle, we have a new Catholic school board in our community which has just. been organized. It is a Catholic lay school board. They are. currently attempting to collate several thou- sand questionnaires that came in from Catholic parents to determine just how the Catholic parents there are thinking along the lines of your question. The. few Catholic parents that. I have talked to seem to indicate that they are going to be forced to hack away from educ.ation at the lower grade level and possibly at the college. level so they might concentrate on their programing maybe at the junior and senior high school level. However, this is pure conjecture on the part. of a few parents that I have talked to. Mr. Scurrn~r. From what little knowledge I have, from wha.t I have heard and rea(l, this appears to be the trend because of the enormous cost involved of education tO(lay, that they just. cannot make it. So there will be a slow hut sui'e abolition of elementary school classes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Cliairnian Pn.iicjxs. Thank vou, Mr. Scherle. Mr. Bell? Mr. Bvri~. Mi'. Chairman, I just have a couple of questions. One of hem is for ~\Ii'. Pogne. Mr J)~~ I font believe Mr. Pogue is back. Mr. Bru~. Perhaps one of you other gentlemen would like to corn- ineut on tlii~. I note in his statement. Mr. Pogue referred to the Adult Edna I jon Act of I 91I(~, sonic of the things he felt we should do. I was PAGENO="0195" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1017 wondering how the adult education program is working down in Ken- tucky. Is it beginning to show signs of life? Or has it been kind of stymied under the direction of OEO as it used to be? Mr. NOE. I will be glad to answer as far as we are concerned. As appendix to the statement-my name is Noe, Sam Noe, not Pogue, Noe from Louisville-I had a statement in there about an adult edu- cation program which we call "The learn more, earn more" program, which we established. In this we have both the basic education for the adult illiterates and then for those who are trying to get a high school equivalency certificate. It has worked now for us for 2 years. We think it is an excellent program. We have, much community support for it. From all that we know about it and all evaluation we can give it, we think it is quite fine. Mr. BELL. In one of last year's amendments in the Elementary and Seeoiidary Act and the. Poverty Act the adult education part of the Poverty Act was taken out of the direction of the OEO and placed under the (lirection of the Office of Education in much the sani.e fashion as you gentlemen were discussing for Headstart. to be changed and taken away from Poverty Act and put under the Office of Education I)epartment. Did you know that Mr. N0E. You mean the literacy part? MI'. BELL. Ti adult education was taken away from the poverty pr gram. Mr. ~\OE. All adult education. Earlier the adult literacy was under one program. Mr. BELL. There is some part, the literacy still is in under the OEO hut. essentially the major part of the adult education- Mr. XOE. It is one of the points, sir, we were making. `When you are dealing with different, agencies, this is a good example, we were deal- ing with Frankfort., which was operating under the. State department. of education for the basic literacy program. Then we were working with our local community action commission for the rest. of it. One had money at the time. when the other didn't. So. these were compfi- eating factors. These are the things we were saying, if we could ~re.t. them channeled in more direct line, it could help us a(lrniilistratively. Mr. BELL. As you know, the amendments last year were very late. The adult. education was taken out. very late so the Appropriations Committee did not change over and appropriate adequately for it. Mr. V.~xJ-Toos~. Mr. Bell. my name is VaniToose. I think there is a feeling. Congressman Perkins and others have indicated this morning that Congress is interested in getting appropriations made far in ad- vance so that there can be better planning at. the. local level. This would ~reatlv facilitate our effort t.o make the adult program even better than it is. A couple. of times already we have had cutoffs before we were com- plete with our program. Not only was this disrupting. hut this wa~ embarrassing and very discouraging in many instances to thoce who were participating when, at. a strategic moment, we had to curtujl the program. I would like to compliment the Congress and the thinking that. is going into this particular aspect. and encourage you to move in this direction because it would greatly aid us. Mr. BErr~. Yes. As I say. this was done late. It was unforfuna~e that we did not. catch up. That. was the first move taken last year, PAGENO="0196" lOiS ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDtCATION AMENDMENTS liv alIlen(Tlllellt. to take basic adult education away from the Poverty Art. ~I think this would be a good move, for many other aspects that van uelltiefllefl have spoken of. Mr. 1~Krn. Mr. Bell, in relation to your question about progress, iii eastern Kentucky this has been a tremendous influence on a great many PeOP1e, beginning with the adult, no formal education, who drepped out of school at the first, secon(l, third, or fourth grade. `lo(lav we are. witnessing, not only, I guess it is all education in a. forni. but there is a social factor involved, and there is a personal factor involved including personal hygiene. It does your heart good in these adult education classes to see men who in the past have not taken a great deal of personal Pride in their personal appearance or the way they are dressed, to go back like you and I-I won't say you, bitt I-when for the first time we recognized there was another sex and we started eOml)ing our hair and coming to school with a clean shut. This is what has happened, and with the great deal of pride I hey get in the instruction, especially the instruction at the elementary level and those who have completed an equivalent of a secondary e(lucat ion program and have reeeived a high school equivalency cer- tificate, this is one of the proudest posse.ssiolls they have, today. W~e are purring the personal pride bark into them. It. is coming out. These same peol)Ie are going forth and they are utilizing this, they are presenting this. This is a means of gaining employment, or looking for bet ter means of enil)loyment or advancement in the area in which they are now working. It has its merit and its has its value and it has been-well. I just. wished everyone that needs it. colil(i have it. If we ould utilize our public, school facilities more hours a day, more days per year an(l get these people back and use the basic high school course of iustiuet~on and offer it to those peoj)le who dropped out. of hth!i1 ~ehnol and get them their high school diploma., which is an anti it ion, and they do not know how to approach it, they have no way to ap~)roa('hi gettimr it. it has merit. Mr. BELL. Aside from the literacy part, this was the intent, of my atiiendment. to get those people you are talking about. Mr. B\KER. I will say this, those people in this area, some of them if they have an axe to grind, it might. be one of us who maybe used the wrong approach and caused this person to drop out of school or as parents we forced him to because we didn't I'iave the finance to support him to go on to school when he had to go to work or maybe like so many of us in eastern Kentucky that were bound by the limi- tations relationship to high schools, back in the days when some of us went or had the opportunity-well, we say we didn't have the op- portunity and ou say. "Well, that is not true," but it is true because in the days past when they were in school the schools were not there and the. transportation could not be provided and some of those in the mountains could not be reached in a given period of time for the formal high school education at high school level. Mr. BELL. I note on ~age 7 of your statement, Mr. Baker, you say that the T'.~. Office of Education should administer all Federal edu- cation legislation. Then you go on to discuss Headstart. What do you mean by all? Are you talking about other education facilities? Mr. BAKER. Yes, sir; I defflhe education as that which involves the complete education of the human being. PAGENO="0197" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDAIIY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS 1019 Mr. BELL. Of course vou are not going so far as to get into the military aspects? Mr. BAKER. No, sir. I am talking from the standpoint of that which has the involvement of the public school, that whicli we have direct interest in. I believe 1-Tea(lstart is a formal proceeding toward education and it should have a formal beginning and process. Mr. BELL. I am fully in accord with you there, with everything you have said. I certainly think Headstart should go the same direction as adult education. I think it. should get away from OEO and made to be a part. of Education. So I concur. I think that~ is about the essence of my questions, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Let me thank all you gentlemen again. My colleague from California was talking about the adult educa- tion prograni. We started that })rograrn years ago, but we never could get it enacted. We could get it as far as the House Committee on Rules and there it would fall by the wayside. When we were con- ducting the poverty hearings in 19G4 we had the bill over before the Rules Committee at that time. We went through the hearings and in the markup of the poverty bill I had an idea at that time. that we could get the bill enacted if we put it in as part of a package. That is the way we threw it in, as part of the package during the markup. But all during the history of the poverty hearings it was contem- plated that adult basic education perhaps would be the major aspect of the training under the community action program, that is title II. The real purpose of the adult basic education program was to create the incentive on the part of the States to initiate an adult basic ediica- tion program and we earmarked so much funds for ever State. But it was well understood that as much community action funds as the local community action agencies wanted to expend could be expended for adult basic educat.ion purposes. We are making some progress, and von Kentuckians have made your part of the contribution. Again I am delighted to welcome you here. I hope to visit with as many of you as possible, especially you superintendents in eastern Kentucky. Mv eastern 1~entuckv superintendent is absent now. There is only one from my district, my friend from Bell County. 1)o von want fc~ make some comment? Mr. BAKER. T didn't have an opportunity on the school constniction. I think I would be badly out of line if I did not ask for iwrmission to comment concerning the area of construction in easterii Kentucky. Chairman PERKINS. Of course that is one of the greatest areas of need in the whole country. Mr. BAKER. Because tlìe. one-room schoolhouse still exi~ts, the lack of health and all the other facilities are there. We may he more for- tunate in Middlo~horo to have the facilities to take. care of the present. The future we don't know what it holds. AU the other district, that adjoin us in eastern 1~enturlcv have the needs, will have them and will continue to have them unless we can get some support and help for them. Chairman PERKINS. I want to say for the benefit not only of you gentlemen, but my minority friends over here well understand, and the majority, that later on this fall when I get~ some of the most press- PAGENO="0198" 1020 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS ing legislation out of the way, I certainly intend to hold school con- struction hearings and education hearings in general, trying to come up with some other improvement in the general area of elementary and secondary education. I don't think we can for a much longer period of time l)us11 under the rug school construction. Is there anything else, Mr. Bell? Mr. Bri~L. Nothing furt.her. Mr. IDonsoN. Mr. Perkins, I would like to express the appreciation of the delegation for this meeting and to tell you in your new posi- tion as chairman of this committee, if there is any way that any of us from Kentucky can help this cause, we will be glad to come hack. Chairman PERKINS. You come hack anytime. We will be glad to see you. (The committee recessed at 3 :20 p.m. until 9 :30 a.m., Tuesday, March 14, 1967.h PAGENO="0199" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS OF 1967 TUESDAY, MARCH 14, 1967 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR, Washington, D.C. The committee met at 9 :30 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Carl D. Perkins (chairman of the committee) presiding. Present: Representatives Perkins, Green, Pucinski, Daniels, Gib- bons, Ford, Hathaway. Scheuer, Meeds, Ayres, Quie, Bell, Erlenborn, Scherle, Dellenback, Esch, Eshleman, Gardner, and Steiger. Staff members present: Robert E. McCord, senior specialist; H. D. Reed, Jr., general counsel; WTilliam D. Gau1, associate general counsel; Benjamin F. Reeves, editor; and Louise M. Dargans, research assist- ant. Chairman PERKINS. The committee will come to order. Our first witness this morning is Carl L. Marburger, Assistant Commissioner for Education, Bureau of Indian Affairs. We are glad you are here this morning. Th~ provision that we added last year concerning the Indians which you know expires this year, we would like you to review this and then proceed with your statemenL STATEMENT OF DR. CARL MARBURGER, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER FOR EDUCATION, BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPART- MENT OF TIlE INTERIOR Mr. MARBURGER. The Department of Interior supports and endorses an extension of the Indian provision in the. Elementary and Secondary Education Amendments of 1966, as 1)loposed in H.R. 6~230. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 did not include provisions for Indian students in Federal schools. Based on such factors as family income, isolation, English fluency, and cultural deprivation; American Indian children constitute one of the most severely disadvantaged segments of American society. In an attempt to remedy this omission, we cooperated with the Office. of Education in drafting an Indian amendment, which was included in the Elemen- tary and Secondary Education Amendments of 1906. The Committee on Education and Labor is to be highly commended for its support of the Indian aniendrnent, for without this support, ESEA programs for India.n children in Federal schools could not have been implemented. 1021 PAGENO="0200" 1022 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDI'CATION AMENDMENTS It is also to the credit of our school staffs that so much progress has been made under the 1966 Indian amendment. ill enriching our educa- tional program. The 62 title I projects approved to date include the following components: ~ perc~1~ of the projects relate to reading programs: 4S percent of the projects relate to guidance, counseling, attend- ance. social work: 19 percent of the projects relate to parental service, home-school counselmg; 56 percent of the projects relate to English as a. second language, English language arts: 6 percent of the projects relate to speech therapy: 40 percent of the projects relate to physical education and recrea- tional activities: 51 pe~e~t of the projects relate to cultural enrichment; for ex- ample, art, music, field trips: 45 percent of the projects relate to reduchon of class size and de- velopment, of remedial learning centers; 32 percent of the projects relate to inservice and preservice train- mg~ 32 percent of the projects relate to teacher aids. At. present. there are a total 42.650 Indian children being served l)y title I projects totaling S4,746.54S. Chairman PERKINS. Before we get away from title I, where you have 42.650 Indian children being served, with a total of $4,746,548, what is the per capita expenditure? how much does that average? Mr. M.\RBI~RGEr~. About S100 a child. It will range between roughly S35 and Slot). Chairman PERKINS. I thought it would range more than that. Mt'. M~\RPJRGER. Because of the funding time and a half-year pro- gram beginning about January 4 w-hen the money was transferred to the Department of Interior, with only a 6-month program, we actually received much less than the. normal school system would. Chairman PERKINS. If von had been on an all-year-round basis whh the added formula we put in the bill last year what would the alloca- tion be? Mr. ~L\RBtIi(;En. It would have been closer to $8 million to $10 mill ion. Chairman PERKINs. A little over $200 per child? Mr. MARRITTiGER. That is right. Chairman PERKINS. That is what puzzled me. Go ahead. Mr. M~\flBuRGER. 5127.000 was made available under title II of the Elementary and Secondary Education ~ for students attending Fe(leral schools. A formula based on enrollment and need has been (levised and approved for expending these funds. The average per pup1 allotment will he 52.62. Fnder title III of ESEA. flip Bureau of Tudian Affairs was advised of an allocation of S204,000. Twenty-two title III projects have been submitted, totalin~ ST82,9'~9. The educational programs offered under the authorization of the 1966 amendments has expanded our ability to provide both quality and quantity of enrichment, whereas our regular appropriation has been limited to a traditional operating base for our schools. PAGENO="0201" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1023 Problems have arisen, however, in the implementation of Indian projects. Because of the necessity to work out administrative details, the transfer of funds from the Office of Education to the Department of Interior was delayed until January 4, 1967. Thus, the Bureau of India.n Affairs became an active participant at an inconveniently late (late. Projects ha.d to be developed in a short time which did not always meet the most urgent requirements of quality education. Also, the 1966 amendments limited the Indian program to 1 year, ending June 30, 1967. The time available for the implementation of projects, January 4 to June 30, 1967, does not permit time development of programs that will make a real difference in the achievement of Indian children. These factors of time, the late start coupled with time cutoff date of June 30, 1967, have been severe handicaps. Extension of the Indian amendment to June 30, 1968, as proposed in H.H. 6230 will permit: 1. The planning phase for projects proposed for the 1967-68 school year to begin immediately. This would allow- (a) intensive consultation and planning between the Indian community and the school to establish priorities. (b) consultant help from the Central Office Staff, Bureau of Indian Affairs; and Office of Education to help organize plans for projects. (c) recruitment now for personnel that will be needed for projects planned for 1967-68. Specifically, quality programs de- pend on quality personnel. These people are available in the early spring and summer for contractual agreements for the. next school year. They are rarely available in September or .January. 2. Successful projects miow in operation could continue where appro- p it ate. 7. Advantage could be taken of a "continuing resolution" type of legislation to allow continuity in program development. 4. Personnel hired for the 1967 project period would not have to be di~rnissed June 30, but could continue in service for the following year. They would be available in the summer months to assist in planning proJects. This would he of particular importance where highly trained professionals with special skills have been hired. \Vhile a start has been made, and we are leased with our program as it has developed, we are aware of the limiting factors of traditional funding patterns. Extension of the Indian amendment to ,Tune 30, 196$. will provide additional funds enabling further progress in our program of enriching and upgrading Indian education. Chairman PERKINS. 1 appreciate your statement l)ut I think some- where along the line if we are going to give the various school agencies and the local districts the opportunity to plan in the future we might as well throw out the limit on these 1-year extensions. Do you not think it would he much better and provide a much better planmng base from your standpoint if we extended the program. say, to June 70, 1969, because next year you are going to be under the same gun that von are under right now Why not let us have a better opportunity to come. in here and work on legislation when we are not under pressure and likewise you can PAGENO="0202" 1024 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS do much better planning. Do you agree with that statement that we ought to extend this program for Indians at least 2 years? Mr. MARBL~RGER. I not only agree, but I am happy to amend my statement to that effect. Long range planning does take a commit- inent. of more than just 1 single year. Chairman PERKINS. We are just going to travel over the same ground if we continue to give these 1-year extensions and this is going to be a~ most discouraging thing to have on these good programs in the future. I certainly intend to offer that amendment before the com- mittee and hope we can get it enacted. We appreciate your statement. You mentioned you did not get your funds until January 7, 1967, or sometime in early January. You do not feel that situation will recur next. year, do you? Since you have had an opportunity to consult and advise with the Office of Education, do you feel you have gotten over that hurdle and that you will get your funding? Mr. MARBURGER. It was simply how the funds would be transferred and writing up the guidelines. Chairman PERKINS. How would the June 30 cutoff period affect you? Mr. MARBCRGER. It affects us very seriously because we cannot en- cumber funds beyond the June 30, 1967, deadline, so we cannot involve ourselves even in summer programs for Indian children in schools. Therefore, the hiring of personnel became a critical problem for us because we could only hire people from the point of the beginning of f lie project until June 30, 1967. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Ayres or Mr. Gibbons, any questions? Mr. MARBURGER. Mr. Chairman, may I just speak for a second to title III since it is part of the amendment. as well. We had even more critical l)lohlerns under title III because of the cutoff date. Our proj- ects were submitted to the. Office of Education by January 15. Approval has not yet come for any and the expectation is the projects will be approved sometime around the 15th of April and they must terminate as of June 30. So it gives us a very short time to do an exemplary model program. Chairman PERKINS. You may go ahead. Mr. MARBITRGETi. I was simply indicating we had had unique prob- lems here in trvin~ to run a program from approximately April 30 to June 30 and with no opportunity to obligate funds beyond t.hat date. Chairman Pnncixs. 1)o von have any questions, Mr. Gibbons? Mr. &IBhiC)XS. ~\o. Sir. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Scherle? i\[r. SCHERLE. ~\o questions. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much. Mr. MARBURGER. Thank you for the opportunity. Chairman PERKINS. I notice it is 9 :45. Under the rules of the com- mittee, today is reserved for an executive session of the full committee to he~in at. 9 :45 a.m. Al this point, since there are fewer than 17 members present we don't have a quorum for the executive session and therefore I will adjourn the regular meeting for the lack of a quorum and we will continue with these hearings just a.s we are continuing at the present time. PAGENO="0203" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1025 We~ next have several witnesses representing the American Associa- tion of School Administrators, Dr. Everett Keith, executive secretary,. Missouri State Teachers Association; Dr. Warren Phillips, superin- tendent of schools, \Talparaiso, md.; Dr. Harold Spears, superin-~ tendent of schools, San Francisco, Calif.; Dr. Forest Conner, executive secretary of the American Association of School Administrators, Washington, D.C. You may proceed, Dr. Phillips. STATEMFJNTS OF EVERETT KEITH, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, MIS- SOURI STATE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION; WARREN PHILLIPS, SUPERINTENDENT OP SCHOOLS; HAROLD SPEARS, STTPERIN- TEI~TDENT OP SCHOOLS; FOREST CffNNER, EXECUTIVE SECRE~ TARY, AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OP SCHOOL ADMflflSTRATORS Mr. PIHLLIPS. I am Warren Phillips, superintendent of schools, Val- paraiso. md. On my immediate right is Mr. Eldon Stimbert, for- merly chairman of this committee, superintendent of schools, Memphis, Tenn. Next to Mr. Stimbert is Superintendent Harold Spears of San Francisco who has the unique experience this year of being president of the American Association of School Administrators and as such has visited and conferred with and spoken to school people and com- munity groups all over this country. He has had a most unusual experience this year. (in my far ri~ht is Mr. Everett Keith executive secretary of the Missouri Teachers Association. On ni far right is Forest Conner. executive secretary, American Association of School Administrators. We appreciate this opporthnty to appear here today. For more than a centuiy. the Association of School Administrators presently with a membership of over 1~,000 school administrators from the 50 States has been firmly committed to the preservation and strengi Ii~ ening of free public education. As von all understand, these men making up this association are devoting their entire lives and their energies to the daily and the Jifetirne task of providing better educational opportunities for all ~ youth. We weLorne the opportunity of joining hands with the Congress and agencies of the Federal Government in strengthening the educa- tional programs throughout. this country. Since the membership of this association are in daily contact with all of the children, the entire school staff, all community groups, in other words, the forces of the entire community, we believe that we can Fe of help in bringing the resources made available by the Federal Government to a realization of the intent of Congress. We can pledge you full cooperation. We believe that through this back- ground of experience, and training our associates represent the skill, competence. and training necessary for identifying the educational needs and translating programs into action in the classroom where education really takes place. PAGENO="0204" 1026 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS We hope that we ma be permitted to suggest, to provide informa- tion, and to raise questions. We can assure you that our total com- mitment to quality educations, that education is a vital basic force in shaping the quality of American life and that what happens in the ci assroom ul t Imatelv happens in America. Particularly since the passage of the Elementary-Secondary School Act of l96~ we have had the pri~-ilege of working with Members of Congress and with this committee in common purpose. The U.S. Office of Education has been most cooperative. We hope and we trust that this spirit of partnership may continue to grow. We believe it. is possible to build this relationship and strengthen education with- out. Federal control and without excessive loss of energy through du- plication or redtape. We pledge our full cooperation to this end. Already some of the problems have been introduced relative to the prol)le.ims of the. local agencies, with the Federal Government in corn- ii ion purpose a ml particularly tin lung. Chairman PERKINS. Do you have copies of your statement with von today? Mr. Pirirjjps. A limited number. I am just about. to call on Mr. Eldon Stimbe.rt at. my immediate right who will make a statement. I believe he has presented copies to you. I think this would be a good time to call on him. STATEMENT OF E. C. STIMBERT, SUPERINTENDENT, MEMPHIS CITY SCHOOLS AND MEMBER OF TEE EXECUTIVE COMMiTTEE OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS Mr. STIMBERT. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, first, of course, we do want to say how much your dedication to education has meant across the Nation. Probably never before has the news media and public in general raised education to such a high level, their concern and their involvement. It is a privilege and honor to appear before you along with my col- lea~rue.s of the American Association of School Administrators. I wish to compliment, the chairman and members of the committee-and members of the committee staff for their wisdom, moral courage, dedi- cation, and demonstrated leadership, which in combination have re- sulted in a contribution to the improvement of the quality of elemen- tarv and secondary education unparalleled in the history of our coun- try. The number of educational bills enacted by t.he 89th Congress is si~nificant and their impact upon the educational community and the general public is indeed impressive. The Memphis news media carry almost as many stories about ed- ucational activities in the Midsoutli as they do about the war in Sout.h Vietnam. Generally speaking this is the situation across the Nation. Today education is front page news; 2 to 3 years ago this was not t.he situation. Education is riding the crest of favorable opinion of the vast majority of the people of this country. Our country is chang- ing rapidly in all areas-science, agriculture, technology, medicine, electronics, communication, and transportation-to name but a few. PAGENO="0205" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDtJCATION AMENDMENTS 1027 These changing conditions present new problems. and challenges to school administrators and teachers who must. (levise new Concepts and teaching techniques if they are to satisfy the educational needs of schoolchildren and the demands of their parents. AASX strongly supports and urges continued Federal aid to education. There is little question that education throughout. the Nation has been considerably strengthened by the help we have received from Congress. We are particularly grateful to this committee and to its counterpart in the Senate. Without your dedication and hard work the educational legislation would have been far less workable than it. has proved to be. Our schools are truly in your debt. However, I would respectfully draw to your attention those aspects of continued or amended Federal legislation concerning education which are of particular importance to school systems across the land. There is need for increased Federal aid. Dr. Bernard Donovan, superintendent, of New York City school system, appearing before this same committee last week, stated at that time only ~ percent of his total funding was Federal dollars. We in Memphis receive even a smaller percentage of our total operating budget from Federal sources. However, again, without these funds we would have had to curtail many, if not all, of the special services we are giving, particularly to the children in our disadvantaged areas under title I of the Elemen- tary and Secondary Act.. lii order to pe.rnuit the flexibility which is needed to attack the edu- cational Problems-problems which vary from State to St ate and region to region-we. hope that Con~iess will look more and more to the provision of general Federal aid. There is no question but that the. Fed- eral Government. ha.s the right to set. broad limits within winch this Federal aid would operate. We merely wish to point, out. that the. con- tinuance of a large variety of categorical aids make.s it. iliost (lifliclilt for the school administrator and the board of education to carry out programs of education in priorities determined by local needs. We realize that. this committee is aware of the general versus cate- gorica.l aid dichotomy. We further realize that. it may be necessary for the Federal Government to continue the use of categorical aids tern- pora.rily for special purposes in order to achieve the certain (lesiral)le outcomes. However, the basic provisions for the schools would he more desirable in the form of general aid, supplemented by any neces- sary special aids. During the period when categorical aids must be maintained until such time as general aid can be acceptable, it would be extremely help- ful to the many school systems if the. prescriptions on each of the cate- gorical aids would not be so excessive as they are at present. We are speaking not only of legislation prescriptions but. the guidelines fol- low-ed by the administrative sections of the Government. as they seek to carry out the legislative intent. As one superintendent, recently re- ported, "We are trapped in the redtape syndrome." The. paperwork iiivolve.d in the application for funds and in the conduct of the pro- gram requires a disproportionate amount of staff time which would be put to more productive use. Those of us represented here today, and the organization we speak for, are greatly concerned with several other aspects of the funding PAGENO="0206" 1028 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDtCATION AMEND~IENTS of the Federal programs. I would be remiss then, if I did not, before proceeding further, say something about appropriations. There is a great need for Federal appropriations to match Federal authoriza- tion~. School systems build their planning and their hopes on authori- zations adopted by Congress. They then find in the course of ap- 1)ropriations that the money forthcoming for these authorizations does not contemplate meeting the full program either in scope or in length of time. We would also appeal t.o the Congress for earlier appropriations action. In the. Memphis City school system, we have in the past 2 years started Federal programs under authorizations but the funding has come considerably after the beginning of the school year. It is not possible., or feasible, for any school system to gamble on funding nor is it desirable to start programs after the school year has begun because. personnel are not available. This fact alone reinforces our position in another matter-namely this-it is difficult for a school system to predicate a program upon an annual appropriation without the knowledge that the appropriation will be continued into a suc- ceeding year. Almost every progra.m involved in Federal legislation requires the appointment of personnel. It is impossible to employ personnel without a reasonal)le expectation of maintaining the appointment throughout more than the course of 1 year. Competent personnel are at a premium these days in school systems and it is impossible to attract such personnel for Federal programs if the.y feel that their employment is simply on a year-to-year basis. Furthermore, the funding of Federal programs is tied inescapably to the funding of local programs. Good financial planning for school systems requires that sources of funds be known in advance so that effective planning can take place. This cannot be done adequately on an annual basis. \Ve would appeal then to COIIaTeSS to try to make its educational appropriations for the succeeding year known at. least by early spring-more specifically by March 1. School systems are organized on the basis of school years and, al- though we know that this is a new organization for the Members of Congress to consider in their appropriations procedure, we hope that through your committee, Congress will become aware of this appropri- ation timing need. May we poiiit. out. also that when appropriations come late they are generally iot for the. full year and very often t.hey lead to unwise use of the funds, because there is an attempt to spend quickly what should be spent. carefully over an entire school year. We would also propose that. Congress give consideration to a pro- vision that. would enable Federal moneys to be expended for capital outlay purposes-and also, that. these funds be appropriated. School systems everywhere are faced with the perplexing problem of once identifying problem areas, a.nd planning programs to meet the edu- cational needs in these areas, of not. being able to implement that. program. The reason they cannot. implement the program is because of present overcrowded conditions in the schools and, consequently, there is no available physical facility available to house the new *ti~ rogramS. PAGENO="0207" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDT~CATION AMENDMENTS 1029 If I may illustrate by mentioning a problem we have m Memphis. We are totally dedicated to the idea of preschool training being cle- sirable, inasmuch as research shows us that. there is a significant dif- fe.re.iic.e between the achievement levels of children in schools who have had preschool kindergarten experiences and those who have. not. WTe have 25 kindergarten classes in the city of Memplus being operated with Federal funds. We would need in capital outlay money alone $4.5 million to build classrooms to house the 10,000 kindergarten level children presently in the city. Other systems, both large and small, have similar problems in varying degrees of complexity. WTe feel, then, that the Congress could make a great contribution to the improvement of education if they would provide for site acquisi- tion and construction money. We do not suggest. under which section of which act this should l)e (lone, but we do know that. the many programs envisioned under the legislative intent, of Congress and the many ideas which we are prepared to carry out. for the betterment of children cannot be carried out. if we do not have the facilities in which to place these programs. We would like to briefly mention an aspect and problem of teacher training that. we would hope Congress would be sympathetic to. The many programs being initiated into the many school systems of the Nation require skilled and competent personnel. As I mentioned earlier, the competence we ne.ed and seek is scarce. In light of this then, we are encourai~ing. and in some cases requiring, our teachers to go hack to the university to acquire new skills and competencies. `We would hope that Congress would provide legislation to insure the right of teachers to deduct from gross income their necessary educa- tiona.l expenses in submitting their Federal income tax returns. `We strongly feel that the success of any new educational program is a function of the type of teacher that works with l.)OyS and girls, will any program be successful. `We feel that. these teachers then, should receive this consideration from the Congress and have the op- portunitv to deduct. their necessary educational expense.s as they seek to improve their skills. The. benefits to school systems and schoolchildren gained with Fed- eral funds provided under title III of the National Defense Education Act are monumental. Instructional materials and equipment. for edu- cational programs in mathematics, science, reading, foreign languages, geography, history, civics and economics purchased with NDEA and loca.l marching funds have whetted the appetites of school boards for additional Federal dollars: stirred the imagination of the. teachers privile.ge.d to utilize the materials and equipment and motivated pupils to achieve academically. Just as it is important that our Nation meets its obligation to the develop- ment and training of children's intelle.ctual capaeitie~, it iS also our ebligatioii to assure their proper health and physical development. The more we learn about the interrelationship of mind and bo(ly. the more it les'onies clear that the ability to learn depenc1s a great (Teal upon physical ~vehl-being. We should concentrate on adequate health and physical education progranis in our p:)lic schools. The foregoing are excepts from the remarks of Congressman Lloyd Meeks of the Second District of the. State of Washington contained in Congressional Record of February 21, 1966. the day he introduced PAGENO="0208" 1030 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMEWPS a bill to amend title III and title XI of the National Defense Edu- cation Act. Such actions will help encourage health and physical edu- cation just as the National Defense Education Act has stimulated academic progress. We support t.he extension and expansion of NDEA to include school, health, education, and physical education. Earlier in my statement, I attempted to make a case in support of an orderly transition from categorical aid to general aid. One coi~- dition, and there are several others, I believe, that this committee, the Con~ress and the 1)epartment of 1-Iealth, Education, afl(l \Velfare will require to be. met, priol' to the adoption of a general aid to education philosophy and policy, is that all State Departments of Education achieve a level of competency which would assure that programs funded with Federal funds were properly planned and administered. One functional capability which I believe all State departments of education would like to see strengthened is that of planning. State (lepartinents and the. school systems in large metropolitan areas are faced with a. multitude of complex problems that deserve the attention of highly qualified 1)1an11111g stafi's. As Dr. Bernard Donovan, in his testimony before this committee on March 8, 1967, so aptly stated: The cities of this Nation have been and are now the melting pots of America. They have drawn to them those w'ho seek social improvement, economic oppor- tunity. cultural uplift and social acceptance. This constant shift of population and the attendant delicate, complicated problems which it brings to the city reflect directly on the educational program of these school districts. To identify. isolate, and help solve some of the critical problems which we are confronted, we recommend that. substantial earmarked funds be provided through title V of the Elementary and Secondary Act. of 1965 or some. other appropriate channel to the State educational at~encies for comprehensive, planning for the pro\~ision of quality edu- cation in metropolitan areas including cities of 100.000 or more. Title III of the. Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 is perhaps the. most. exciting title in the act for the simple reason that it is noncategorical in application. TInder this title, school administra. tors, teachers, patrons of the system, civic groups, cultural and pro- fessional organizations. and many others are brought. together in an atmosphere of unrestricted challenge and brainstonning to produce in- novat ive., creative, imaginative, educational programs for schoolchi 1- ciren. This condition is a plus for local communities for reasons which are obvious. The structure of the law a.nd the provisions of the regulations and guidelines pertaining to title III, however, contravene traditional relationships between State departments of education and school dis- tricts by centering project approval autliorit.y and responsibility for administration of proje.c.t. grants in the Office of t.he U.S. Commis- sioner of Education. State commissioners of education are, by law, placed in the difficult, if not delicate posit.ion of being: (1) Respon- sil)le for review'ing. commenting upon. and forwarding a copy of a school distric.t's application, within 30 days. to the U.S. Commissioner of Education, and (2) assuring that. title. III funds are equitably dis- tributeci among the various school districts within the State. State departments of education are vitally interested in title III projects and the results obtained through their operation; however, PAGENO="0209" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTCATION AMENDMENTS 1031 due to the unique role to which they are relegated by law they are, what. might he termed, second-class passengers on a first-class luxury liner. State departments could be strengthened and their traditional rela- tionships with school districts restored if jurisdiction over supple- mentary educational centers and services under title III were placed with them in the same general l)at.tel'n as title I. This is our recom- men dat ion. No one thinks it. unusual anymore that every child should attend school at. public expense for grades 1 through l~. though around the turn of the century the idea of everyone going to high school was not in complete acceptance. Today there is a trend toward adding early childhood education programs for children aged 3, 4, and 5 and grades 13 and 14, commonly thought of as junior college, to the l)ublic school program. We are. moving rapidly toward the point, where education will be a cradle to the grave affair. Project Headst art. funded under the Economic Opportunity Act, and administered by the Office of Economic Opportunity, has contrib- uteci a great (Teal to thousands of presc.hoolchildren and their parents from low-income families. Headstart. has also opened the eves of the general public to the benefits of early childhood education programs, particularly in communities whose school systems do not provide pub- lic kindergarten programs. We view the. general goals of early childhood education programs which are presently operated under the Economic Opportunity Act in the same general context. as similar programs operated under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. In order to avoid dupli- cation of effort by two separat.e departments of the Federal Govern- ment engaged in operating similar programs; to simplify application and administrative procedures and to reduce cost, AASA recommends and strongly urges legislation which would transfer all elements of early childhood education programs which are present.ly a part of the Economic Opportunit.y Act. to the Department of Health, Education, and Welf are. We would like to mention at. this time another proposal. This con- cerns the Manpower Development Training Act. Presently this pro- gram is sponsored and administered through the Labor Department. As you are well aware the MDTA provides for the training and re- training of people for occupational skills in industry. We would pro- pose that the. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare be assigned the responsibility of administering this program. There are several reasons why this would he a more desirable department to assume the responsibility of administering the program. Education is now geared to cope with and to satisfy the needs of individuals This is the type of attention that must be given to the disadvanta~ed, adult as well as child, if they are to succeed. We feel that schools, working with community advisory groups have a more direct relationship between potential employer and potential employee while in training. As it now stands, labor working with OEO activities. Neighborhood Youth Corps, and Job Corps, along with apprenticeship programs, has fostered much duplication of ef- fort. Labor sponsored programs are designed, basically, to satisfy 7~-492--(u7-pt. 2-14 PAGENO="0210" 1032 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTATION AMENDMENTS immediate need~ of employers and pressure groups, rather than giving emphasis to such factors as attitude development, basic and related education, as well as saleable. skills. We feel that this comprehension, of related o~ well as sueeitie lob skills, is necessary for employee satis- faction which should result. in better on-the-job perfoi~rnance. Final iv, editcat ion has proven that it can work effectively with industr to determine employer needs and can develop local training programs which satisfy these. industrial needs. By transferring this responsibility to the I)epartment. of Health, Education, and Welfare we feel that cliipl~ation and ovei1appin~ effort will he eliminated, and another bureaucratic administrative channel will be eliminated. I have attempted to he brief and pointed in my remarks. I thank the committee for inviting us to appear. The opportunity to be some part of the tremendous work that this committee has done and is doing is most gratifying. It has been said that the Battle of W~aterloo was actually won on the playing fiei(ls of Eton. I (10 not know whether this is true or not. I ~iit ii is nearly an absolute truth-and one not fraught with great exa~eration-when we ~av that the. great worldwide struggle in which we are iiow engage(t may well be won or lost in the classrooms of Amer- ica. The l)OV~ and ~irls that to(lay occupy these classrooms are our i inmortali tv-they deserve our national attention. ~i in. ~\Ir. ( `110 :`n~ an and members of the committee, I thank you for aivill~ me tins chance to be heard. I sincerely hope the views wL ~ch I have e.xpresse(l will be useful in your deliberations. ilnink you. Chairman Pi:nujxs. Thank you very much. Mr. PFCTNSKT. i\fr. ~timl)ert. your te~timoiiv is extremely interest- ing and you have told us what your future needs are, but could you give us a very quick review of how effective your programs have been up to now. I have noticed that witness after witness comes before the committee here and tells us al)OUt what the programs are and how they should be expanded. what you fellows need, what amendments ~ on support. in the act: but I have not heard too many people coming hefore this committee to tell us what are the concrete results that we are getting out of this mass of Federal aid to local communities. I am sure it is there. but I would feel much more comfortable if you gentlemen would come before this committee and tell us specifically what has been accomplished with this massive help in compensatory education so we could then have some idea where to go in the future. Mr. STTMBERT. I think your question. of course, is a very important one and what. use we have, been making of it. Mr. PUcINsKI. I know what use you have been making of it, but I want to know if you are conducting any tests or studies or surveys to evaluate the products of these uses. I know it has been a short. pro- gram. WTe have only been in this for a couple of short years. After all, when you get all through with this testimony your main drive is to help improve the students' learning ability and understanding. Now what impact is all of this having on the student himself, and what results are we getting? Are we setting up vast programs that get all complicated but are not. reaching the student? Is the student showing an improvement in reading al)ility and is he showing an un- PAGENO="0211" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1033 provement in this cultural enrichment and in math and science, and so on? I wish the witnesses coming before this committee would direct their attention to this aspect, because I want to know if this massive help is helping upgrade the student.. This is what this whole program is all about in the final analysis. I regret that I have not heard too many witnesses come before us and say this is what we have accomplished in 2 years. These are the levels of improvement that we have accomplished. If they are not there, tell us. This does not mean that the program is bad. Maybe it is too early to evaluate, but I would like to have some appraisal from you gentlemen as to what we are achieving with the student himself with this Federal aid. It would help us a great deal in selling this program. Mr. STIMBERT. I think you have touched on a couple of points there that the committee might comment, on. For each project that we set up, and of course some do have achievement factors and others may be health factors of achievement.. For example, a breakfast program would have an impact on what is happening in the schools, and we do not have any project without evaluation before and after. I am sorry we did not bring some of those along. It is important that we do that. In our own city system, we are spending a considerable amount of money to set up basic data on every pupil in the system so that as we move into any program, whether it is a lighted library program at night, or whether it is a breakfast prograni or a specialized readmg program, whatever it might be, and these are multitudinous in their applications to different pupils-we will have the basic data on the pupils that enter that program. And then we can do the very thing you are talking about. One of our difficulties is the fact that. we have not hail most of these programs a sufficiently long time to know what the effect is going to be and some of us are guessing that perhaps the things that we wanted to do for years we can now do in terms of equipment awl materials and teacher aids and specialized programs. I think we have, to run through some of these long enough to see what. the effect. on the pupil will he, but. I don't think we ought to (10 it. without evaluating and bringing back to this committec the results of such evaluation. I am sorry we. do not have it today, but. you are absolutely right.. It should have an effect. Mr. PFcINsTcr. ~Vould von know offhand how many youngsters in your public school system live in federally financed projects? ~`rr. STIMBERT. I don't have that. number. Mr. PucINsIci. Is it a substantial number? Mr. STIMBERT. It is a substantial number. Mr. PurciNsici. I submitted a proposal to increase aid to impacted areas including federally financed public housing students. Would this be of substantial assistance to you? Mr. STIMBERT. Yes, it would very definitely because of the number of housing projects we have in the city. and of course this is a general aid. It helps you do that which you need to do without having to tie it to a specific category. Chairman PERKINS. Before leaving this point and the gentleman's question about. evaluation, and about which he questioned you along PAGENO="0212" 1034 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS this line as to the effectiveness of this program, numerous witnesses who have, testified along this line, think the county superintendent from Bell County. Ky., showed the conditions and the number of par- ticipants at. the time the programs were inaugurated in the school system last. year. In my judgment, they have made a very effective evaluation. Mr. P~cixsi~i. You have done such a great job in the schools in Ken- tuckv I am afraid they almost stand apart by themselves. Chairman PEHKINS. We have had evaluations throughout. the coun- try and many of the greater citizens have evaluated some of the pro- grams. Mr. STIMBERT. I might add one thought along the same line. Some of our projects involve teacher training. If you consider the short length of time we have been in this to train the teacher, the effect of the pupils will not take place for perhaps another year or two, because these teachers who have been in a training program have not yet been assigned to some of the programs. Mr. Prrixsi~i. There is no question in my mind that this whole Federal aid program has l)een of tremendous help to local communi- ties. but I think it will help this committee continue this program anti convince the Nation that we have to have it continue. If we do have a reservoir of benevolence here showing what has been accomplished- that. is the only point I am questioning. I am not. questioning the value of tl~e program, because I support. it very strognly. Mr. PUILLIPS. I think a. great deal is being done and the measure- nient of a specific activity or program (Toes take time, and sometimes it ~s very hard to isolate. i\tr. SPE\RS. May I speak to that, Mr. Chairman and honorable members of the committee. I think I will take off from Congressman Piicinski's questioning. I will take one example. I won't carry it too far. \Vhen title I came in last. year. San Francisco qualified for ~3.4e0.000 under title I. Those piogl'ams were not estal)hished until Februar. We happen to be on a semester plan. Many school pro- grams are on the annual program. We were able to get off with our p1'og~~m in February. hut many throughout the country could not. do so. In our case, we operated that particular program. for 1. year. Our concern is in extending it and keeping it going. I want to emphasize again we operate two budgets in San Francisco. We operate. the "sure" budget-the State and local money-and we operate the "maybe budget-the Federal budget. We have as many as ~00 or 300 teachers and they work along with the regular teachers and they are fully credentialed and employed, but these teachers have to wait to see if they are fully accepted as part of our school system. Now, evaluating that program, we people who are in education know that you can't use a test to evaluate everying. The person who knows what. is happening to a child in the classroom is the teacher. I can attest. to von since I have traveled this country this year as president ot our association. I can attest to you there is confidence in the work being done under title I. But for us to come up with test scores, we just. cannot do it to give you the evidence that you might want~ or expect. Tn our particular program, we have gotten great mileage out of it.. We have taken children out of poverty areas and we have moved them PAGENO="0213" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1035 to classrooms in other parts of the city and the receiving schools re- ceiving these children, received these children in good style and they are making a success along these lines. I think the NDEA Act which has been in for some year is a better one to enable you to see what has been accomplished, rather than the present one which is a young act. and our efforts are relatively new. 1 want to emphasize again what it means trying to get a group of teachers, 200 or 300 of them in this program, and hold them on the sidelines each year and tell them: "You are not quite a part of our organization." They are working side by side with other teachers, but we are not quite sure that we can rehire them. And if there is one point I would like to make, I think more important than any of the aspects of these changes in this bill, I think the most important. thing that Congress can do is to appropriate money on a longer basis and let us work with what. we have and not tie ourselves up too much with the revisions of it, and get off on that track and move along. I would sacrifice changes in order to get the funding and the ap- propriations coming along, if we could do that. We are concerned about the revision to a certain extent, and other things have been put in this act. All that we trust is that. you will also realize this means more money unless we take something out that you already have, and you can't. stop the program for these children. They are on their way, and you can't. take it, away from the children or the community; and we can't, because the local boards work with these citizens. If we try to take it away and can't, we have to try to find more local taxes somewhere to carry it on. W~e can't treat a child or a community that way. When the Federal Government starts on funding of public educa- tion, you can't. back up. You can't hack up just. as we can't l)ack up on a local basis when we start something that is good for the people and they want it.. We would like to get off of this two-budget sstem that we have in San Francisco, and you are the people who can get us off of it. Mr. FORD. Mr. Chairman, I have noticed there is a lack, in the test imonv coming to the committee thus far, of either subjective or objective opinions with regard to the cquif~es or incquities of the ~)rogram carried out under the act. The act as originally conceived had several features in it. that we considered would cultivate or en- courage greater support in some areas from State and local sources that. the schools are now getting. The so-called incentive grant, provision that was in the act in l9IhS and came out. promptly in 19(6 was entirely for that purpose. There are other features of the act. that were. intended to do this. We have staved away completely from any kind of State or local matchin~ in the programs under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. In going into matching, one of the things that we accomplish is that we stretch the Federal dollars farther and we get this partnership going where we have both partners or all three 1)artners putting something in the pot. From the beginning of this hearing we have heard testimony indicating that the State departments of puIl)lic instruction want to exercise more authority over ESEA funds than they now exercise, particularly title. III: that the local officials PAGENO="0214" 1036 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS want to have more flexibility than they now have, particularly in title I. But we have not heard anybody give any indication that since the Federal Government began spending money in the Elementary and Secondary Act this has spurred loca.l and State resources or people in charge of State and local resources to any greater efforts in the same areas that we have targeted this money toward. Perhaps you gentlemen could speak to that. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead and comment on that briefly. Mr. SPEARS. On the subject of compensatory education, when your act came along, we already put $750,000 in our budget for compen- satory education doing the same thing. When your act came along, we could not use the Federal money to replace local money, so we go beyond that. But the pump-priming principles you are talking about are working in the Vocational Education Act. We are putting in quite a bit of money now if we are to continue those programs. I feel personally that this country needs more money for education and the local taxpayer cannot carry the burden. I would hate t~ see the Federal Government look at it as a stimulus for taking a property owner again, a small property owner, and taxing him more to support education because we get excited about what you have started. What we want is additional funds from Congre.ss generally. You don't know how many school systems might not be able t.o take ad- vantage of the Federal funds just because they might have the State Vocational Education Act. The well-to-do States and communities will come up with extra moneY. hut the poor ones will not. Mr. FORD. That is all very well and I have been guilty of saying over and over again in my own area the local taxpayers can no longer afford to take the. burden that they have, and the Federal Government ought to be relievin~ their burden. But that does not. explain great disparity between the effort l)eing made in one part of the country and the effort being made in another part of the. country. We have one State that does not tax real estate one penny for schools, whereas in the State of New Jersey real estate is taxed so heavily that I don't understand how you can own real estate there. You can't sa.y that. everything is heinu (lone as long as this disparity exists, and I have heard no testimony thus far before the committee to indicate, that there is any great ground swell of effort across this country to change the disparity between zero dollars to 80-percent support. ~Jr. PHILLIPS. May I make a specific comment, if I understand the nature of the question. and give a specific illustration. I .think that the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of l9GS has served to point up and stimulate interest, in many, many areas. Title II for libraries-in our own community. since the inception of that support. has increased its own support for libraries by over 50 percent. in addition to title TI. The General Assembly of the. State of Indiana, from which I come, closed last week. The State's appropriation for education for the new biennial. I think, increased in their effort 23 percent. So I think there has been in many instances a stimulation by virtue of this help, and by the emphasis that has been placed on special needs. Mr. SPEARS. I think you might have somebody to make this study for you, to make a study of the local tax issues t.ha.t have come in PAGENO="0215" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDI'CATION AMENDMENTS 1037 school districts the last 2 years, and see how many of them are being defeated. Mr. FORD. Eighty-six percent of the bond issues floated last year passed. Mr. SPEARS. There are quite a number of them in the California area where you have nothing but homes to tax. Mr. Foim. Not operating funds? Mr. SPEARS. These are operating funds with which they are getting their tax base raised in order to put more money in the budget, and those are things you have to look at. I think definitely there are tax- payers in this country who feel that now that Federal money is corn- ing along they may very well not have to spend so much. It is not that they should take that attitude, but there may very well be that type or reaction in certain communities. But this money you are giving us is not for all of the children. Itis for a certain element of the children, and generally, as you know, the heavy load is in title I; and title III is somewhat different, of course, but again I would like to close my testimony by saying, give us funds for 2 or 3 more years, put them ahead that far and see what we have and then we will have some- thing to evaluate. Trying to evaluate a child's education in 1 year, I can't sit here and mislead you people as to what we can find out about it. Chairman PERKINS. Did you have a statement you wanted to make? Mr. KEITH. I might say the infusion of funds for the Elementary and Secondary Education Act has enabled us to do many things we have not been able to do before. If we could get the money a little earlier it would be helpful, and, too, if we could have some capital outlay funds in title I. Most of the suggestions have already been made. The teacher shortage situation that you hit on for the handi- capped, I might mention we have an extreme teacher shortage every- where-I guess as bad as it has been since World War IT-and it is particularly true for this under the handicapped. 1 am sorry we can't give you this evaluation. We had two projects in kindergarten. I can report as a result of Federal interest, in education-the impetus that~ it gives-it looks like our general assembly for time first time will make State aid available for kindergarten. ~o it is having an impact on the things, you do maybe more than you know. ~ hairman PERKINS. Mr. Ayers, any questions? Mr. AYERS. No question. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Daniels? Mr. DANIELS. There is a statement in the center of page 9 which recommends that the Manpower Development and Training Act pro- gram be transferred to T-IEW rathe.r than maintaining it in the Labor Department where it is at the present time. When that act was originally conceived and adopted. its purpose was to upgrade the skills of the workmen. It was subsequently amended primarily for the purpose of improving their reading and writing so they could read plans and sketches, but primarily it was upgrading their skills. Why do you recommend that it be t.ransf erred to HEW? Mr. STIMBERT. Speaking from our own situation there, as far as the Manpower Development and Training Act is concerned, I say in the statement here tha't education has been working with these particu- PAGENO="0216" 1038 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS mr employment groups, vocational groups, labor groups, business groups, industrial grou~)S. And it would seem from the standpoint of these skills we are talking about there is a world of experience with- in the educational framework, in the educational society for perform- ing these tasks in cooperation with the employment service. It just seems. since, we are in our particular case and I think nationally doing the middle part of this sandwich, so to speak, where the employment survey is made and then the people are turned over to us for training in these areas, and then employment picks up to place them, we could he related to the U.S. Office of Education instead of another particular governmental subdivision. There is a complexity here of administration that makes it difficult. Mr. l)ANIELS. The program has worked out so well over the past few years and it has received commendation from all quarters-in fact when we amended the bill, we did it purposely to upgrade their literacy, hut that is not. the basic part of the act. The basic part of the act is to up~rrade their teclmical skills. Mr. ~TTMBERT. Of course, we have had these years of experience in vocational education, and I think what we are looking at as school administrators is the fact that w-e can be more efficient, the school system can spend its dollars better, as we make the statement here, if we don't ~zet some. overlapping and duplication. I would not want this to be construed as a criticism of the present program as it relates to a partic- ular individual who has received the training, because there is nothing wrong with that aspect. This is an administrative device for the chan- neling of dollars. which I think is pretty fundamental when you begin to operate zomething here that involves millions of dollars. Mo~t of the systems now- are large systems that we are talking about here in thi~ connection. \Ve. are in urban areas and we are related to so many (lift erent sources of funds that I think some clarification ad- ministrativeiv is really desirable. That is the angle that we are ap- proachin~ it from, it seems to me.. I don't know whether I have aflswere(l your question or not. I am not critical of the program at all. (`hairman PERKINs. Mr. Quie. ~ QFTF.. \Vliat would have happened in training and retraining if we did not have MDTA over these years? Mr. STIi\rnEr~T. "Iffy" questions are difficult to answer. I don't 1n'mow what w-niild have happened. I think some type of training has been essential but I would remind the committee that l)ack before we had Mf)TA there was much training in the skills that we are talking nl)out in vocational education and in the adult programs which most city svstem~ were offering. T 1-mow- in our own situat ion in Memphis we had supervisory training for foremen in industry. We were moving in on-the-job training with di tterent ~roups in different industries. Acrain. let me say I think this program has been tremendously effec- tive because in our particular case we have worked well with the Em- ployment Service and I w-ant my comment to be labeled as an admin- istrative reaction and not a criticism of `the nrogram. I don't know whit would have happened if we didn't have it.. In answer to an "iffy" question, it seems to me many people mm- matched with iob~ that were available. As I see it.. this is one of the tliin~s we tried to do in MDTA, particularly to find what is the labor market here, that. is the untrained labor market here, and here are 1obs PAGENO="0217" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS 1039 available and to get the people and the jobs matched so that an mdi- vidual can market his skill and go to work and earn his money and support his family and be taken off the relief rolls. Mr. Qv-IE. We did a job but I do not believe you could say it was a great. job, could you, of matching jobs with people? We still dont know the jobs that are available and the 1)epartment of Labor has not given us a list, of jobs that are available and where these people are on a national basis. Mr. STIMBER'r. On a national basis, no, but on the local level it has been done to a fairly successful level. Mr. Q~IE. What. if we upgraded education as we in the i96;~ act. didi and put this mone in vocational education rather than MDTA ? That is another "iffy" question, but. what do you think about that Mr. STIMBERT. I, personally, would have favored that approach. I still think it would call for a high level of cooperation with the Employment Service and you would certainly have to have the surves of the labor market. I do riot, see the school system with a wall built aroun(l it and not serving its communities. I would still have to have these communi- cative devices between the school system and business and industry to be served but I would favor the suggestion you just made. Mr. Qv-IE. Under MDTA, a great amount of the training occurs with on-the-job training. Do you think the vocational education would have gotten along with no O.JT program rather than under MDTX? Mr. STIMBERT. Mv own personal opinion is it would have gotten along better. This is a certain local comment. and perhaps it would not. have national implications but I think it would have been more effective. Mr. ~ Some now want. to transfer Ileadstart to HEW. Now, witnesses have come to us through the, many days of hearings and said they wanted Headstart. transferred to the Office of Education. Is there some significant reason why you say HE\V rather than OE Mr. STDIBFRT. Probably many significant reasons, but No. 1, again, I think that in Jjeadst.art we have had, if I may be so hold as to say so, almost a parallel system of education setup which I think, if I am to reflect. the attitude of our public, at least, is not. a desirable way to insure the. effectiveness of public education in the days ahead and we see this running through some of m'v thinking. here is an educational program an(l it. does not belong in a new organization. It does not belong in parallel personnel set up to do the job. It belon~s in the U.S. Offi(e of Education and a Ileadstart program is very definitely tied to the first grade or to kindergarten, depending on what `von have previously in your school system. Mr. Qr-IE. You meant the Office of Education when you said TTE'\V? Mr. STTMBERT. Yes. Mr. QUTE. You might. still favor a parallel educiition sv~tems? Mr. STIMBERT. What pages was that? We will make. the correction. It. should have been BITS Office of Education. Mr. GIBBON. I know that 78 percent of the people enrolled in 1-lead- start programs were. enrolled in this type of program in private in- stitutions and not in l)uhlic educational systems. I wonder, with the puhlii' educatioiial institutions as strappedl as they are for classrooms PAGENO="0218" 1040 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS and facilities, how do you propose to make up that shortage and get the job done? Mr. STIMBERT. Of course, again we are utilizing all of the facilities of our city, the parochial and the private, in setting up our Headstart programs. These people helped us plan the program and are on the committee, and I don't think that that would necessarily have to be changed: the involvement of them and their facilities would not at this point have to he changed. Mr. SPEARS. May I make one comment here? We feel that this is an extension downward of public education. We think those children need the help of a professional teacher. If they are going to come in at four instead of five and you are extending 1)liblic education down, why would you not put it. in the school system with the management that we have and the understanding that our primary people have of young people? We think it is a ehance operation if you let other parties come in, and I. personally, feel at times the employment factor comes into a He.adstart program in which case somebody is conc.erned about em- ploying somebody. That may very well come in with an outside agency in this. It wouldn't come in with the school people because we will say the person we are going to hire is trained for that job just as well as he is trained for the first grade or kindergarten. That is one reason why we are so selfish about it. We think you are extending I)ublic education downward so give it. to the schools. Mr. GIBBONS. There are 23 States that do not have any kindergarten. That. is one-half of the States numerically that don't even have kinder- garten and you say von can do this, it is in your doma.in, but what has happened in the past 100 years? Mr. ScilEr-ER. Has there been a single State which has instituted kindergarten since the beginning of the Headstart program? Mr. STIMBERT. I know systems have hut I don't know about States. Mr. QFIE. One of the things that OEO has brought about in fund- ing Headstart through the. community act.ion agencies has been a greater involvement in the parents of poor kids and the community, itself. If we transfer Headst art to the Office of Education, how would you maintain or give it the assurance that this involvement will still ~)la.y a dominant role? Mr. SPEARS. You have in a modern school system great play back and forth a.t the kindergarten level between the parents of those young ~hildren and the school. That is not anything new to us. Mr. QUIE. In the kindergarten with a middle class or upper class family you have an easy problem. Mr. SPEARS. Kindergarten is for all people provided at public ex- pense and it is not just provided for a certain group. As to the facilities, we run two prrn~ We run what we call preschool and we don't. call it. Headstart and we are running it out of title I funds but paralleling that. also is in San Francisco your Headst.a.rt program through the other agencies, hut they use our schools, also. We provide the public buildings for them. So, we are trying to get maximum use of our public facilities in San Francisco, regardless of who has the money to provide the programs. I would not have realized that 75 percent of these programs-I think your point was-are in othor than pub1k~ ~hoo1 buildings. PAGENO="0219" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTATION AMENDMENTS 1041 Mr. GIBBONS. I am just quoting statistics that came from Sargent Shriver yesterday. He said 70 percent of the kids in He.adstart are iii private institutions. I have no way of checking those figures. Mr. QIJIE. If YOU had the responsibility for a Headstart program and you did not have the buildings, would you be able to contract with a church ~vhich had the facilities which they would probably only use on Sunday to run a year-round Headst.art program? Mr. SPEARS. If the facilities are proper, you can contrac.t with any body so far as I know, a public institution can, for outside facili- ties. Of course, you have to be very careful that they meet the sanita- tion regulations, the number of toilets you need and all of the things that von require of a schoolbuilding. California is very strict about buildings. particitla ny because of earthquakes. I (lont sax they (lont. meet the regulations, but if you have, a ~chool system you have someone who is already disciplined in the 1~e of place for a child to go to school in and when you farm this out to some agencies you are taking a chance. Freedom schools may start some- where, and the question is whether the requirements will meet the re- qui rement,s of the schools. Mr. GIBBONS. I am glad you brought up the subject of California. I visited there several years ago. I have forgotten the name of the town now, but the two finest buildings in the town were the school system and the sewer plant. I guess the sewer plant was used indis- criminately by everybody on a 24-hour basis, but the school system was sitting on this little green grassy knoll in the poverty program there, the tutorial program: they were having to work in some humble place. I asked why they did not, use the schol and they said they couldn't get cooperation from the school system. They were tutoring Spanish-Amenic~ui people going to that school but they could not use the building. Ts California changing its attitude toward things like that? Mr. SPEARS. I don't know. You are making a case. on one observa- tion hut I feel that that is not. so generally in California. Mr. GIBBONS. I could take you to the place. Mr. SPEARS. Your example is fine and I am accepting your word on it. but that does not represent California as a whole. We push other agencies to use them. In our last bond issue in San Francisco for buildings, we tried to get other departments to try to come. in and l)uild programs, maybe baby clinics and all of that. To try to get the agencies of a community together on soniething is a little difficult at times. Mr. STIMBERT. May I just add to that that with some 722 schools they were used by community groups over 6.000 last year. We encour- aged the recreation commission, the park commission, community groups and adult education from the universities to use our school buildings. We would like to have them O~~fl 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, if possible. Getting back to Headst.art, I think it is important, as Mr. Spears has said. Here is an educational program and it (Toes not necessarily follow that some of these innovations such as parental involvement is riot something t.hat has been used or heard of by school people in years. This is what we are finding in Headstart-t.ake my own case, for example. I came from Nebraska about 10 years ago to Tennessee. No preschool programs. The State. program started at grade 1 and ran t.hrough grade 12. PAGENO="0220" 1042 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Now, because of some pilot programs in the State which we were able. to ~et, a couple of them, and that is not much for a large city system, and then utilizing Iieadstart and now title I for ~5 kindergar- tens and this going out across the State in Knoxville and Nashville and other places. the State legislature this year is considering acldmg kin- dergaiten and this gets back to a question raised by someone here- they are. considering-I don't know whether they are in session now- hut kindergarten could very well become a part of the State minimum program which would be just fine. In other words, for years here is a sclioolman who would like to have had kindergarten but when you went. to local commissions and State legislatures, the money was not given. This push is good and we should take advantage of it. \Ve have some administrative details that we ought to clean up and 1)ut it in the educational program where it belongs. Mr. FORD. The statistics Mr. Gibbons was giving you were that Z0 percent of the programs liv number and 00 I)ercent of the children who are in Headstart are in programs operated by the public school system under community act ion programs. What concerns us is what you mean to do when you make your rec- omendation with respect to the. other 10 percent of the children and :30 percent of the programs. There are two kinds of recommendations that have come to this committee from witnesses. Almost every witness says for some reason that something magical will happen when you transfer the program for funding l)'pO~s. and that is all OEO does. They do not ad- minister them directly. The Office of Education supplies guidelines. If you transfer the. entire operation to the Office of Education or ITEW. ~oniething ma~ical will happen and this great educational pio~ram will work better than it has and it will be easier to administer in- the public school systems. The only complaint I have heard voiced thus far by the public school system is there is a double level of administ.ration between them and the Government by having to go through community action but nobody wants to venture across the line and tell us what you have in nund for these other programs. Mr. Fuller made it quite clear the other day that. in his opinion iio- body but. public school people should be running aid-to-school lro- grams and Headstart programs. If we accept. the premise that head- start is pure and simple education programing and if we do the same with it as we do with all other programs below higher education, only the public school agencies will he able to operate TTeadstart. because we have restricted every education bill for people below the higher education level to a public school agency. Other witnesses when we have asked them about. this have indicated they would like to (heal with the Office of Education but allow- the rlonpul)hic agencies to stay in i)usiness. Again. with Mr. Gibbon's example in California, in the Watts area, the two T-Teadstart programs we visited out. there were both housed in privately owned building~. the rent for which was being paid liv a ~roiip of businessmen in lVatts who became concerned over the fact there was not a Tleadstart program and who started putting up the money on a sui)scrlJ)tion basis. PAGENO="0221" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTATION AMENDMENTS 1043 Do you want to put these people. out of business? Do you think the public school system has done such a good job up to now that they have. any standmg to come before this coimnittee now and ask that this ~)rogram, one. which has proven itself to be almost completely success- ful as a poverty program, should be turned over to them just because it is working? Mr. STIMBERT. I will he bold enough to make a. statement. I wish you had visited our lleadstart program. too, I think it. would be bad to get into Government by exception. Shall we abandon 40 State denartments maybe because 10 are weak? I I hink we have across this eountrv many TIea(lstart programs. Ours started when there was no community action committee, and some 7,000 children were involved in it ill cooperation with all levels of the community. I am talking now about the parochial schools and others. It would seem to me that our surveys arid thinking about this should be in terms of wha.t the public schools of the Nation have (lone in other areas. Mr. FORD. That. is the very point. Since we started TTeadstart. ever hod sas it is working: it is a good idea. Educators have been writing articles in education journals about. them for as long as I can remember reading them. Your legislature talks al)Out the possibility of kindergarten iii your State. Now I would like to ask you have any of time 26 States which had no kindergarten programs before Headstart was initiated started speml(ling local money for a program like Ileadstart. or over and above our money for lleadstart since Headstart proved it will work ? Areimt we facing the. situation where we say if the program works we will only (10 it if we get. the Federal dollar to spend on it ? Mr. IvEITTI. It. does not seem to me to be a matter of whether the pmg~~rn works or whether it. can he made. to work more efIectivelv. I know by and large in our area Headstart. has been done largely through the public schools. It seems to me what we. are discussing here is the fundamental question of whether education should be channeled. generally speaking, through educational agencies to pm'event duplica- tion and prevent the tendency in all levels of government and all de- part ments getting into the. act. and having an education program. Mr. FORD. I have before me the .January 1967 Municipal Statistical Bulletin of the Investment, Bankers Association showing for calendar year 1966 covering the sale of all bonds as a result of local elections across the country for school construction. Table 6 of this publication shows State by State the total dollar amount of educational bonds asked for and passed for elementary and secondary education. I would like to insert, this in the record at this point because it demonstrates the communities receiving money under this pro~ra in are approving money at the local level at an inverse rate. The more money you give them, the less tendency there is to approve 1)011(1 issues. The two States selling the most. l)onds for elementary and secondary education are California and Michigan. Pennsylvania is the third largest with $184 million in elementary and secondary education bonds. California sold $346 million worth of locally voted bonds last PAGENO="0222" 1044 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS year. The State of Alabama, one of the principal beneficiaries under this, sold $7 million for the whole State. California got a little less than 3 percent of its school budget, and Alabama is somewhere around 30 percent of their total budget, from ESEA funds. Some of the States are doing much better in their higher education facilities by selling bonds because we have some matching type pro- grams. Some are doing well for elementary and secondary education.. There are, surprisingly, a couple of places where they did not ap- prove a single bond issue for the construction of schools. (The table referred to follows:) Toble 6 [In nnllions of dollars] Education St ate Elementary & secondary Total Quarter Year to date Quarter Year to date Alabama 1 7 37 99 Alaska p Arizona 2 14 4 42 Arkansas 1 2 1 2 California 38 346 49 406 Coloradn 7 20 9 31 Connecticut 2 23 2 28 Delaware 3 4 3 4 District of Columbia I Florida 3 17 3 68 Georgia 11 65 42 100 llawali idaho 2 5 2 6 Illinois 17 84 45 197 Indiana 33 83 40 101 Iowa 1 35 9 45 Kansas 5 24 7 34 Kentucky 4 31 9 50 Louisiana 20 45 20 53 Maine 2 15 Maryland 43 Si 43 89 Massachusetls F 37 86 50 100 Michigan 72 219 74 252 Minnesota 21 53 33 96 Mississippi 6 10 27 F 31 Missouri F 1 42 11 F 74 Montana 4 19 4 F 19 Nebraska 2 4 2 33 Nevada 1 10 1 10 New Hampshire 12 12 New Jersey 6 48 6 48 New Mexico 19 41 New York 39 119 137 375 North Carolina F 5 63 North Dakota 2 9 2 11 Ohio 25 102 30 119 Oklahoma 12 27 32 64 Oregon 12 33 25 50 Pennsylvania 41 184 43 200 Puerto Rico F Rhole Istant 6 9 South Carolina 1 19 1 21 South Dakota F 3 9 F 9 Tennessee 2 20 F 2 Texas 48 147 63 223 flab 4 S 4 I 9 \ertuout 1 6 F 12 V!rzjnis 52 52 \iraiit tsl:tnts Wasliiturtoii 6 21 6 28 We~t Vireitila 25 28 Wiseonsin 12 F 12 F 6 Wvomi~tz I S 1 10 Tntal: F -________ ___________________________ Current 556 2355 897 3,469 Year ago 610 2, 7t6 738 3557 PAGENO="0223" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1045 Mr. ScilErra. Have any of you geiitlemeii read the three recent reports of the National Advisory Council for title I? When Congress passed the title I program for ESEA in 1965, we set up a National Advisory Council to report back. rfliey have issued three remarkably interesting reports. I would urge you to study them. They have some great lessons arid the chief among these lessons is that the public school system, as an institution, has clone far less than it should and, hopefully, will, in applying the lessons we have learned from title I and in changing its way of doing business. The programs have been scattered and fragmentary. The public school system as an institution has been very reluctant nationally to reach out to parents. I am sure many cities have done an excellent job, but as an actual institution the public school system has not reached out. to parents and has not provided health care and nutrition some have used virtually all of their title. I funds in feeding and clothing children. The Advisory Council reports are shocking and appalling. No member of this committee would deny a child coming t.o school for food and nutrition and if that can only come out of title I funds, I am sure we would say something about it. but that was not the pur- pose of title I funds, to feed and clothe kids. This is a. local welfare responsibility. The same thing would go for the. comprehensive social services that are so necessary. The same problem was found in the imaginative and creative use of school aides. It was found that school systems were apathetic to varying degrees and were hostile t.o t.he use of school aides to help fill a desperate need for stuff. Now, you folks want us to turn total control of these programs over to the. state agencies; you want Headstart to go to (.)E: von want title III t.o be under the total control of the. State agencies. Frankly, I would like to see t.he (lay when the State and local agen- cies, education agencies, can handle these funds creatively and con- structively. WThat I would like to know from you is how can we engender some consciousness at the State and local levels that. basic change in our edu- cational system is indicated and that some of the. lessons we have learned in Headstart. ought t.o be. applied? I think it is shocking t.ha.t. not a single State legislature has rece.ive4l the germ of an idea from Headsta.rt. and that preentry education is not healthy and constructive. Not. a single State has instituted a state- wide kindergarten program as the result. of the. 1-Teadstart program 1Vhat do you think the Congress and the National Association o~ School Administrators can do to engender some consciousness of the need for change, create some momentum for change in the. public school system-act uallv, the kind of moment urn tIm at the. T-Teadst art program now provides? Mr. PITILLIPS. Could I make a comment on that? It is pretty hard to identify what causes what. Going back to your comments and the comments that. were made previously, the State of Indiana passed a kindergarten support bill in February of ~ That was just preceding fjeadstart. I don't know whether they are connected or not, but. I know that our State and in our area there is a PAGENO="0224" 1046 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS ti'enieiulous interest in unj)rovement of education. There is a tremen- dotis interest in change. The ch~uige is frequeiitly so great that it almost leads to confusion, 1 )ut the problems are not simple. This matter of kindergarten, I think we have hinT great interest in it and early elementary education interest. In my own coinnilmity. we have had kindergarten for over half a (`enturv. ~eighboring schools lost theirs during the depression. They did not get them back until after World War IL I would say that many of the programs that have been initiated in Ileadstart have stimulated further action but there has been this tremendous interest in early education and change. Mr. SrExris. When you ~peak of having to stimulate a change, one is the l)1~a(ti(~e von are following something innovative, the other is tak- big an ex~unide and getting more support Tocally or statewide and I doit kiio~v where your eliII)hiiSiS is but I am inclined-taking the two toLrether. you are perhaps interested in looking upon this Federal funding as a stimulation for more support on the State and local basis. Mr. SclirtEn. More resources and more support for willingness to change. Mr. ~rrxns. Lets separate the two. Take the last one. This is just observation of one person who has moved around this year, but I doubt very much that this country, the school boards and the State legisla- tures in general over this country are looking upon this new support of (`(lu(ation from Washington as something to cause them to spend more iiioiiey. Maybe I am wrong lint that is my personal observation that they ale not. They are looking at it as money they wanted themselves aWl (lidn t get it. Now, whether they could have gotten more or not-that varies all over time country. Xctivities certainly are stimulating to think in (liflerent ways as to how to handle children and do a better job with them. T)efinitelv that is happening all over the country, maybe not fast enough for von to settle it yet but on the support angle I think there, will be less local support here and there in some bond issues be- (.0 use somebody thinks Federal funds will do the job. Mr. ~ciiE~rit. I can assure you as far as I am concerned that was not mv intent and although I hesitate to speak for my colleagues, this program was not meant to encourage diminishment at the local level. Mr. ~rr~rs. From the standpoint of the legislatures in the States, T (lout think it is diminishing their support. It is sort of slowing it (Town. They might have clone more in this compensatory field. In California. Senator MeAtier had a bill in. WTe in San Francisco encouraged it. I think the funding would have, been much larger if you had not come along. Mr. ~cHERLE. }ranklv. I am inclined to agree with you to this ex- tent. that as long as the Federal Government is going to hold the reins ~ ~ such as Headstart. I doubt that this will initiate action on a state or local level because by shifting this program in areas where they do not have kindergarten. I am sure tins will probal)ly put them in the position of sain~ the Government, which in essence is the tax- payer, will ~ponsor this so why should we duplicate it `? Other than that. Mr. Chairman. I will reserve the rest of mv time for later qiiestioiming. PAGENO="0225" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTCATION AMENDMENTS 1047 Chairman PERKINS. Mrs. Green. Mrs. GREEN. I want to comment on Headstart for a moment. In the schools that you gentlemen represent, do the schools now run the Headstart program? Mr. SPEARS. Yes; we have two types of preschool programs in San Francisco. WTe run one part and someone else runs one. OEO has their own program and we supplemented it with title I funds. Mrs. GREEN. But you do not actually implement the 1-Ieadstart Program. Mr. SPEARS. We finance through title I the lleadstart programs that we are operating in the school system. In our school buildings, there are other programs being operated under OEO. Mrs. GREEN. Who runs those? Who carries them out? Mr. SPEARS. The community agencies that are in those areas. Mrs. GREEN. Did you say in your schools you wrote the ones for UEO, Dr. Stimbert? Mr. STIMBERT. When we initiated our programs, there was no coin- munity action committee and this perhaps changed our initial plan- lung because we had to go ahead if there was to be a Headstart pro- gram. There were some difficulties politically, locally, and this is the reason we went ahead. When the community action committee came into the picture, they allowed us to continue operating so the Headstart program is operated solely by the Memphis Board of Education and the Shelby County Board of Education within that county unit, within the city and coun- ty: OEO funds, I am talking about exclusively. Mrs. GREEN. In looking at the child, in terms of the education of the child, if one agency could look after him from t1ie~ time he is 3 years old until he finished the 12th grade, would we get a better education for the child if it were all under one agency and if there were con- tinuity in it? Mr. STIMBERT. I would think so, very definitely. Mrs. GREEN. What. about administrative costs ? Mr. STIMBERT. I think they would be less, if I sense the reason for time question. I think there would be more efficiency in having one agency all the way through as far as the chilci is concerned-his rec- ords, his health, his academic achievement, home and home surround- ings and community, the impact of various elements in the communit. if this were all understood as a total part of the record on that single child, I think we could do better, a far better job. Mrs. GREEN. Dr. Spears. were you about to comment on that? Mr. SPEARS. I see it as a continuous ladder of education. I would not~ want one agency handling time second grade and one handling the third. As I said a while ago, if this is an education ~ it is an ex- tension of education downward. As I move around in our corn- niunity, I encourage the parents or PTA's anywhere. I encourage time national PTA in Baltimore. all of the parents otight. to have it. Some children have age 4 education: let them all have it and they will put the pressure on their own legislatures and school boards to get it. I am not asking the Federal Government to spend it l)ut I am saying let's extend education downward arid let's take advantage of 75-4a2-67-pt. 2-15 PAGENO="0226" 1048 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS what. children can learn in a systematic way at. age 4. I would rather have it. starting with 4. Since kindergarten is 5, start at. 4 and see what you have rather than going down any further. That is the persomil Opinion I have about extefl(liflg it downward, but. I think it is part of the educational lag we have had in this country. Mrs. GREEN. It might flatter my ego if we, here in Congress, could think we discovered Headstart and kindergarten and nobody in edu- cation thought. this was good for all children before I have to admit in all honesty when I was teaching school more years ago than I care to remember, everybody agreed kindergartens were good for young- sters and if there were funds they would put them in every school, hut. there was debate as to when you could put some children in the school environment. Many States and local school districts could do a lot of good for education and kids if they had the money. Let me turn to one other point that. was mentioned by one of you, that is educational evpenses and the deductions for teachers, which I strongly favor. It seems to me we have had such a shortage. of teachers, it is tragic indeed, and most unwise for the Congress and the IRS to allow businessmen to deduct every expense under t.he sun and not to allow teachers to deduct expenses for advanced training. In line with this. I know Representative. Patsy Mink introduced an amendment for sabbatical leave. I would like to see a sabbatical for teachers. I think it would raise the quality of education. The question I direct to you now: With the shortage of teachers, is this year we should look to Federal funds to help plan sabbaticals for teachers, or do we have to wait perhaps until the Vietnam situation is over? Mr. SPEARS. I personally feel that more local school systems could give sabbaticals to teachers provided they would only do it. They are short on what they have (lone. You asked a direct question and I will give. you a direct answer. I would think that. you could work in other fields better right now than to go and do that job that more of them ought to be doing through State and local funds. It is an important thing but. I just think they are behind, many of them. Mrs. GREEN. If I understand, you are saying as far as the short- age of teachers is concerned, this should not prevent plans for n-iore sabbatical leaves for teachers but in terms of funds this should be a State and local and not a Federal concern; is that right? Mr. SPEARS. When there are so many things to be done at the Fed- eral level. I would just put that farther down the line than some other things. Mrs. GREEN. Is there a~reernent on that.? Mr. Pnirups. I was going to the second part of your comments relative to expenditures for improvement. The obsolescence of the professional training is as real as that of equipment in many schools~ and my own school requires periodic addi- tional training. A simple device would be to give tax credit on this and it would be of sigmficant help. PAGENO="0227" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDtCATION AMENDMENTS 1049 Mr. KEITH. There has been some confusion in the deduction of edu- (`ation expense from the income tax and I think anything that could be done to clarify it would be quite helpful. Mr. PHILLIPS. W7e have a problem on that. each year. Mrs. GREEN. What about sabbatical leave in terms of teacher avail- ability and in terms of Federal funds? Mr. STIMBERT. Perhaps I disagree with my other colleagues on this particular subject., but 1 don't think you want to emphasize quality. We do it in our own system and we have a general sabbatical leave policy and even if there is a shortage of teachers as maybe you put up with a little less in order that the quality eventually may be better, I agree with Dr. Spears that I don't. think it is high on the list but I certainly favor the sabbatical idea and it is urgent that teachers need, and the other is a part of it, if they can teach and attend the local university and college and be deducted from their income ta.x, it can be used as a stimulus for improving the quality of the teacher in the classroom. This is where the whole education lies. You can buy all of the equipment in the world but if the teacher does not know how to use it you a.re wasting your time. This is really going to tie into t.he quality of the teacher in the classroom. It. seems to me we have to lift her mighty high. Mrs. GREEN. Do all four of you agree on the moving from cate- gorical to general aid? Mr. SPEARS. Yes; that is general all ove.r the country and definite among administrators. Mr. DELLENBACK. We are limited by the time, so let me ask a series of rather short questions, hoping to get a. series of short answers, recognizing that we could dwell on these points. Do you have any figure in mind as to the percentage of the cost of supporting schools that you think should come from the Federal Gov- ernment? You have all said that you want more Federal money. The figures that we have been given in prior testimony are that at the present time 5 to 8 percent of the cost of supporting schools comes from the Federa.1 Government. Mr. Keith, what about your attitude? Mr. KEITH. I would like to see a third, a third, and a third. Mr. DELLENBACK. Third local, t.hird State, third Federal? Mr. KEmI. Yes. I think the time will come if the Federal Gov- ernment is going to be a partner it will really have to be a partner and it goes into a long discussion of the tax base. Mr. DELLENBACK. This is a goal toward which you would reach? Mr. KEITH. Yes. Mr. DELLENB.\CK. Mr. Spears? Mr. Spr~us. In San Francisco, we used to get two-thirds of our funds locally and one-third from the State but the State is now down to about 20 percent in our State. We would like to see that margin brought up by somebody. If the State is not going to do mt, maybe the Federal Government will, but the more the Federal Government puts in, I take it you are going to have to go a general fund1ng. Mr. DELLENBACK. You think that the local government should carry about two-thirds, then? PAGENO="0228" 1050 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. SPEARS. No: not necessarily. I am pointing out. what happened to us. Mr. DELLENRA'K. Do you have any figure where you think the Federal Government should go? Mr. SrEARs. I have never thought in terms of particular figures. Mr. T)ELrjxI~~cIc. Mr. Stimbert? Mr. STIMBEET. Not to belabor the point, but I think we would have to throw population figures into this pot. I don't know what local is any more. Mr. DELLENBACK. I was thinking about local, State, and Federal sources of revenue. Generally speaking, local support comes from the real propertY tax. ~s[r. SrIMnErrl'. Ours is local sales tax of 1 percent. Mr. DEr~LExB~~cIc. Do on have any rough idea of a. goal toward ~vli ich the Federal contribution should reach? ~rr. STTMBERT. A percentage figure-lO, 12, 15, I think it. should con- stantly move up as we study the flexibility, the flow, the fluidity of our populatioi~, because people dont stay put and the Federal Government has to be involved because we have people on the move, crossing State and county lines. Mr. DELLENBACK. Do you have any goals in mind. Mr. Phillips? Mr. PHILLIPS. I wOlll(l think it would vary from State to State with the degree of economic strength that each has, a formula that might be adopted. Also, there may he some change in the type of tax bi~se used at the local, State, and Federal level and it would seem to me that. a major emphasis woUl(l have to be on the unit of Government having the major source of tax resource. Mr. DELLENBACK. Would you think in terms of any figures close to I)r Keith's figures? Mr. PHILLIPs. I would think it should be substantially increased at the Federal level and possibiv the suggested one-third, one-third, and one-third, roughly is not too bad. Mr. DELLENBACK. You have all spoken in terms of wanting addi- tio~al Federal money. You have all spoken in terms of wanting this to be by block grant rather than categorical aid. If von do this, can you tell me offhand, each one of you, what the primary use is to which you would put this in areas over which you have control, these additional public funds? What is the great cry- ing need t.o which, if it. came to you in a block grant, you would apply these Federal moneYs? Mr. KEITH. So many under title I have gone beyond your existing programs. Many times you have taken money used for developing and administering programs~ for teachers' salaries and so on~ Mr. DELLENBACK. Over and above everything that has been done, additional Federal money made available to your area, what would you use this for as the very top priority need of these funds that came to von without control ? Mi'. KEITH. I would like to see a general Federal support. As I recall the testimony. Mr. Spears answered between Keith and Stimbert and indicated that he would apply these funds to raising teacher salaries. His was only about a single sentence answer. Mr. STIMBERT. We would like to reduce teacher-pupil ratio for one thing. PAGENO="0229" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDtCATIOX AMENDMENTS 1051 Some of the money could go for the kind of projects that. reduce the number of pupils that. a teacher must be related to. Mr. DELLENBACK. You would put this at the top of the list.? Mr. STIMBERT. rihat will improve what will happen in the classroom. Mr. DELLENBACK. Would you put it above increasing teachers' salaries? Mr. STIMBERT. I don't think we would. Mr. DELLENBACK. Any second priority besides hiring additional teachers t.hat you put at the top of the list? Mr. STIMBERT. We would have to go to construction because we need $41/2 million to put in a citywide kindergarten. Mr. DELLENBACK. What would he the fourth answer? Mr. PmLLIPs. rfl~at is a difficult. question because you would have to take those steps which would improve the quality of education. In addition to some of the comments that have been made here, I think we would extend education downward. `We would improve the teacher-pupil ratio. I think we would upgrade vocational training. I should call it noncollege bound education and we would probably extend----- Chairman PERKINS. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. BELL. As I understand it you all generally agreed the money would be used for teacher salaries. Isni it true if von increase the teacher-pupil ratio really your money is going for salary ? You are hiring new teachers so it is going for teachers' salaries. Mr. MEEDs. If I got your consensus, generally, most of you favor approximately one-third, one-third, one-third of Federal, State, and local. I would like to point. out. to ou that. under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act we had an arrangement. last. year which in effect curtailed any State in receiving more than 3~ percent of its educational budget under the terms of this act. and I think it was raised to 40 percent. last year, if I am not. incorrect. At the same time we enacted legislation which woul(l become ef- fective in fiscal 196g. The amounts received would effect States sPend- ing less than the national average. In other words, they could take the national average or the could take their State. average whichever was higher, and this would increase substantially the funds to those States which prior to this time have been receiving on their State basis and mostly those States were in the South. As a matter of fact, the State of California would not bene- fit by this and many other States. Now, if you gentlemen are suggesting that this should be on a one- third, one-third basis it seems we. are headed in opposite directions. Let me point out to you we presently have States which are at the maximum rate now of 40 percent. I think Alabama and ~\lississippj both are at the maximum. This would mean we should increase our Federal support. to high-income States-in other words, just go the other direction from what we have done. Now, may I have your comments on that? Mr. KErril. When I was suggesting a pai'tnerslnp I thought the. gentleman was asking a question of overall responsibility on the part of each, a total figure. You would have equalization and you would have differences with hi the school district or the States. T would not. PAGENO="0230" 1052 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS think you could just set up a system whereby everything would be clone at every school district on a local, State, and National basis. Mr. MELDS. Mr. Spears~ in California you are receiving approxi- m~telv 3 percent of your total educational budget in Califorma from Federal funds under this act and the State of Alabama is receiving the maximum 40 percent. Now, how do von equalize between 3 and 40 percent? Mr. SPEARS. You are trying to equalize among the States. In the California district, we don't ge.t. the support in our district because of the wealth that. some other district gets. But I didn't give any fi~ure here. All I can say, if Federal support goes up only a Federal percentage greater, we ought to have the right to spend it for what is needed just~ as we spend State and local funds. That is more my con- cern than what the amount is going to he. \Vhen I mention teachers' salaries I do not mean to raise teachers' salaries, hut. I know the salary account goes up for two reasons, more teachers but increased cost of living where, you have to compete with other districts to raise teacher salaries. If that money is coming locally. I would say more of the Federal money would go for the same thing we have to spend local money for. Mr. MELDS. If we were to increase in time State of California sub- stantial Federal contributions, is it your feeling that this would all be utilized to supplement present programs or do you think there will be a reduction of State and local effort? Mr. SPEARS. This discussion started over here. i\rr. MEED5. I realize you di(lnt answer one-third, l)Ut at least two of the other gentlemen did. i\[r. SPEARS. The implication was if you give more of a percentage on the Federal load from Federal sources then what. would you spend it for and the question became how much would that he. That would be a figure anybody could gnes~ at. I would not make a guess, but I am saving the more of the Federal spent, if you are going to reduce State or local money we have to spend some of the same thing that we are spending State and local money for. I think our concern right hum is funding of the present program you have rather than getting tangled up on differences, to move this act along and get it to the Appropriations Committee so we can make maximum use of what we are. getting now. I would settle for what we get now and not argue al uut what is wrong or right liv it. ~\[r. MEEDS. I would like to comment on a related subject. Dr. Stimbert. I appreciate your presentation of support. for exten- sion of MDTX to support physical health and recreation. I support that. Then as a last question. I would like to point out to von that there is a provision against this again under the Elementary and Secondary Act as Mr. Ford pointed out. Now-, assume this money that we would authorize and appropriate were handled by the Department of Health. Education, and Welfare, hut was passed to the State departments of education. Do any of you people see State constitutional problems with, for instance, your State department of education contracting with a local parochial school to rim a TTe.adstart program, use parochial facilities and perhaps even parochial teachers? Do you see problems? PAGENO="0231" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1053 Mr. Piiiwps. The question was raised a. moment ago whether you could use church facilities for public programs. `We regularly do that. Mr. MEEDS. We are doing that in the State of Washington but I am asking now, do you see a legal problem in your State with this ques- tion that I have raised? Mr. Prnu~ips. I think there would be legal problems in running a program for a parochial school and I don't want to get this too in- volved. I don't think there is a conflict in giving a program in which parochial school children participate. Mr. Mis. My question was being conducted in a parochial school. I think we all realize we do not have enough educational facilities to run concurrently some of these programs so would the answer to the program be Mr. PHILLIPS. We have not used parochia.l school facilities. We have used church facilities and there is a slight difference. Mr. MEEDS. You do not satisfy any proposals? Mr. SPEARS. No. Mr. GARD~R. In the testimony in the last several weeks I think we heard expressed several times the idea that Federal aid is absolutely necessary, but we have also heard expressed the idea that it. possibly could be done better on a State level. I would like to ask two questions. First of all, do you think if the funds were identical and the States had proper financing, could it be better handled by State agencies as opposed to Federal agencies? Mr. PHILLIPS. My personal opinion would be that it could be. Mr. GARDNER. It could be? Mr. Prnuars. It could be. It is most difficult for a staff or for a school corporation to operate under two sets of rules and that is what. in many cases we. are doing today. It is creating some confusion. There is some loss of pow'er. loss of energy and I think someone has said we need to get. a little closer to where the rubber meets the road. Yes, I think it would be an improvement. Mr. Stimbert, I have mentioned some of my administrative feelings before in this rega.rd and even though our relationships with the TT.S. Office of Education and other Washington groups that have educa- tional programs operating in our schools, such as the Labor Depart- ment. Department of Agriculture, and others, I still think from the standpoint of just plain good business it ought to be canceled in a certain way, and that is why I would answer "Yes" to your question. ~ GARDNER. I am specifically referring to a. tax-sharing plan which is being given some thought in Congress today and there are several proposals which wouTd eventfully phase out Federal programs and put. the entire responsibility for it on the. State level. Mr. STIMBERT. I would like to subscribe to the title 5 which is the strengthening of State depa.rtments. Mr. SPEARS. Yoi.i are just going to get more overhead in the manage- ment. If you and your organization set up for it it stands to reason if they do their part there can be less money spent for the middleman. Mr. GARDNER. This is w'hat has bothered me about the testimony of Commissioner Howe, PAGENO="0232" 1054 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Although he seems to talk in terms of strengthening State and local agencies, at the same time each of them are coining from Federal agen- cies and I see a great duplication of effort on their part. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Steiger. Mr. STEIGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Stimbert, you made an excellent statement. It was candid and provocative. I think you did a very nice job and I complement all of you for being willing to come and give us the benefit of your thinking. Is there general agreement on the part of all four of you in support of the bill that we have before us in terms of the Teacher Corps? Mr. STTMBERT. Yes, with those proposed amendments that you are including, is that what you have reference to? Mr. SmIGE1~. Yes. Mr. STIMBERT. Then the answer is `~Yes." Mr. STEIGER. How much use are each of you making of the Teacher Corps in your own areas and has it had any benefits? Mr. SPEARS. The funds are limited and the program had to be lim- ited until this time and I think it is one of those programs where school systems, that are short of teachers more than others, will get more mile- age out. of it and I think that would be proper. You could not expect all of them to use it equally because it is meeting a need and the need is greater in some spots. Mr. STEIGEE. Is there also a. general agreement from all of you in terms of transferring the responsibility for title III t.o the. State cle- i art ment.s of education? Mr. Stimbert.. in your remarks you hit upon that specifically. Would that be true. of all of you? Mr. PhILLIPs. Yes. Mr. STEIGER. This is in line with what Mr. Gardner asked. In title III we are trying to strengthen the State departments. Is there also a general agreement on the part of all of you that this is an admirable goaL that. we really should be devoting more time and attention to putting into State departments more resources, and more capability to handle the States' problems. Mr. ~TIMBERT. I would give it a No. 1 priority. Mr. PI-IILTJPs. It. is very ba.sic. Mr. SPEARS. I would support that statement, too. Mr. STEIcER. Do you share, a concern that perhaps some of us do as to what. the role is of the research centers and some of the quasi- public agencies that we have created under some of our legislators which are almost in competition with state departments, they get paid bigger salaries, they can perhaps fumtion in certain ways outside of the State department. Do you think there is any danger here toward strengthening these outside agencies rather than the State (lepartment.s? Mr. STIMBERT. You are referring to the regiona.l laboratories? Mr. STEIGER. `les. Mr. STIMBERT. I think there is a. place for such if we. continued to look at the label. It is supposed to he a ]aboratory and dedicated to R. & D. in education. I think the danger you express is there. Anytime you set up such a device and you strengthen it unduelv and do not have it come under PAGENO="0233" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1055 certain administrative organizational techniques, von are in danger of having it run contrary to the State departnient and regional labor- atories covering State lines which could do this. I think there is a study now that has been released on laboratories, and I would ask the committee to take a good look at that study. Perhaps the number of laboratories needs to be reclucecL but there is a place for research anti development in education. Mr. STEIGER. With the caveat that we don't so strengthen them in the process and weaken State departments? Mr. STIMBERT. That is my point, yes. Mr. STEIGER. Let me ask just one further question. I don't know that I was satisfied by the answer that was given Mr. Quie, in terms of Headstart. one of the beneficial parts of it has been a greater involvement of parents in education. How do you propose. if we. transfer Heaclstart to the Office of Edu- cation, that we t.ry to maintain that same kind of pai'eiital involve- ment in this kind of program? Mr. STIMBERT. May I be candid again? Mr. STEIGER. Yes. Mr. STIMBERT. It would seem to me that there is no greater involve- ment than we have had in first. second, third, and fourth grades. I think we have elevated something here which does not exist which is participation of the parents iii the program. I don't think we have taken the time to contrast it. with pareiits' participation in other school programs. We have lifted tills up as niucli as riding in elevators and riding in airplanes. I-Ieadst.art programs, kindergarten, first grade, trips in high school to industry and busiiiess ho thesc many years. we would like to do 100 times more of it, but we are not able to do so because of lack of funds, so that is my answer. ~ I think it is not difficult to involve parents given the right kind ~ pi'incip1e, leaciership. an(l the kin ci of teachers-and tocia in most school situations parents are involved, very much so. Education is quite an important topic of discussion around the American home today, and you get more suggestions from parents. People move into our city from Detroit, Cleveland. San Francisco, and Valparaiso and they come with other ideas about school systems anti they just about last to reflect the national flavor of education. It can't be very local so I don't. see any difficulty in involving parents and I don't think it is innovative to do it. Mr. PHILLIPS. I am very complementary of Headst.a.rt. I think it is a grea.t contribution and it has been the pointing up of the im- portance of early education in childhood a.nd the placing of some money to experiment. in an area where there was no money. I doift think the innovation is very significant. I think much value has come out of them, but I think the. things we have done in them are things we might have done had we had the re- sources for so doing. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Bell? Mr. BELL. No questions. Chairman PERKINS. Let me ask you gentlemen to stand aside sub- ject to being recalled. I think I should give the National Educa- PAGENO="0234" 1056 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS tional Association an opportunity to make their general statement nOW. STATEMENTS OF JOHN M. LTJMLEY, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF FED- ERAL RELATIONS, NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION; MRS. MARY C. GEREAU AND STANLEY J. McFARLAND, MEMBERS OF THE STAFF Mr. LuMu~y. I have filed my statement. In the interest of time, Mr. Chairman, you may want to just file it. Chairman PERKINS. Your prepared statement will be inserted in the record at this point. I hear no objection. You can proceed in any manner you choose, Dr. Lumley. (The statement referred to follows:) TESTIMONY OF JOHN M. LuMI~Y, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF FEDERAL RELATIONS, NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: I am John M. Lumley, Director of the Division of Federal Relations of the National Education Association. Mrs. Mary C. Gereau and Stanley J. McFar- land, members of our staff, are with me this morning. I appreciate this opportunity to appear before your committee to discuss the Elementary and Secondary Education Amendments of 1967. Passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 has been one of the most important educational events of this generation. After only two years. there have already been major impacts on the scope and quality of American education. We believe that federal money alone will not solve the problems facing our schools but we also believe, that, under existing school financing arrangements, they cannot be solved without federal money. The ESEA, by providing comparatively substantial funds as an incentive to state and local education agencies for specific purposes and under specific conditions as determined by the Congress, has already achieved three important contribu- tions to the ideal of meaningful education for all American children: 1. By focusing attention on the economically disadvantaged, the Congress has recognized the importance of education in overcoming the problem of the poverty cycle if each individual is to have an opportunity to achieve economic and social well-being. This recognition has activated public interest in an appreciation of the vital role of education. Although improved educational opportunities alone cannot solve all the problems faced by those who live in poverty, it is encouraging to note a national recognition of the fact that without improved educational programs none of the problems will be solved. Unfortunately, the handicap of limited state and local financial resources has resulted in many school districts being unable to meet the special needs of the economically disadvantaged. Title I of ESEA has given the school authorities who recognized these needs an opportunity to develop programs which they knew were needed. Title I has also served to awaken those who may have been unaware of these problems. And. finally, Title I has served as a federal incentive-to the school systems who ignored the needs of this special group. The degree of success of Title I programs is probably measurable in direct proportion to the attitude of the local school officials. Thus, since the programs have been overwhelmingly suc- cessful to date, we can conclude that local school boards are interested in providing good educational programs wheim possible. 2. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act has encouraged innovation- by providing the funds to state and local school systems to discover and utilize the creativity which has been financially undernourished in local districts. Under Title III, for example, we see the fundamental innovative philosophy of ESEA. Increased cooperation between the teacher education and research programs of higher education institutions and the local and state school systems is proving PAGENO="0235" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1057 to be mutually beneficial. More involvement of state education agencies is essential in this picture, however, if the results of the school-college cooperation is to be disseminated widely beyond the local area in which the innovation takes place. 3. The provision in ESEA for the inclusion of all school children, including those not currently enrolled in any school, has been of great value-to both the educators and the children involved. A positive value of this congressional policy has been to bring the public and nonpublic school educators together to plan and execute programs to improve education for all children. The ESEA has assisted educators in meeting their responsibility to all school- age children including those not currently enrolled. Programs designed to meet the challenge of these children are becoming more widespread. Our recommendations for strengthening H.R. 6230 follow: I. Full funding of the authorization provided in Title I of ESEA is essential. We are concerned, as surely this Committee must be, that the budget request for FY 1968 will not meet the Committee's intent that no state receive less thaii it received this school year, even though the income factor in the formula was changed for $2,000 to $3,000. The school districts have been planning on fund- ing at not less than their allocation for this year. This will not be possible within the present budget request. We realize, of course, that the appropria- tion function is under the control of another Committee. We strongly recoin- mend that you urge the Appropriations Committee to meet the stated intent that no district will receive less funds next year than it received this year. Ac- cording to estimates given to this Continittee last year. full operation of the amended Title I program would cost in excess of $2.3 billion. A major concern of state and local school systems is the problem of the timing of the appropriations. The story is one with which you are all very familiar. Present appropriation time and the fiscal school year are itot (ompatil)le. This problem of appropriations being made too late is the most frequently voiced concern of school officials all over the country: We recommend a five-year authorization to provide for long-range planning and most efficient use of funds. II. The intent of Congress has always been to strengthen the state departments of education. a. However, the establishment of Regional Education offices can, in our opinion, place an unnecessary additional level of bureacracy between the state education departments and the Office of Education. It could be an avenue for direct involvement of local and federal officials without any relationship to the state education agency. FSOE dealing directly with 30 state education agencies, without an elaborate regional organization strengthens both the federal and the state agencies. b. We recommend that at least 75% of Title III funds should he transferred to the state education agency for distribution to such local district projects as the state education agency approves. For the present. the remaining 25 per cent should he reserved to the Commissioner for special demonstration projects designed to meet national objectives. These projects should he review-ed and a recommendation ma(le by the state education agency or agencies within whose jurisdiction the pilot and demonstration projects will operate. c. We recommend that Title V B as proposed be amended to provide that tl1e state education agency be responsible for establishing the Comprehensive Edu- cational Planning Agencies. All funds should he channeled through the state education agency in accordance with a state plan approved by the Conitnissioner. d. We are aware that some state education departments are small and their financial resources are inadequate. We sn~qert the allocation formula change as provided in Hit 6230 as a practical way to strengthen these state education agencies. III. At several points in hR 6230 it is proposed to authorize direct contracts between the IT SUE and profit-making private agencies. We continue to believe that this is a questionable policy. ( See attached letter dated May 3, 1966.) We recognize the tremendous contribution industry is making to improve technology. We believe that industry has a vital role to play in education. We oppose only the direct contractual relationship between industry and the Office of Education. This education-industry relationship should l)e limited to the state or institutional level. Specifically in hR 6230, Title II Amendments to the Vocational Education Act, it is proposed that $30 million be allocated to the states for experimental PAGENO="0236" 1058 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS mid pilot innovative programs in vocational education. This is commendable- except that the amendment would allow the U.S. Commissioner to award grants or to make contracts with the state education agency or local public or non- Irotit education agencies-or with private profit-making agencies from the state's allocation. He could (Ompletelv by-pass the state agency. We oppose placing this responsibility oii the U.S. Commissioner of Education. Tli~ acceptable alternative w-ould be to make the allocations to the state agen- dos for vocational education, under a state plan, with authority to contract ~vith public or private agencies for services not possible within the normal vocational education program of the state. We find no justification for con- tracts between industry and the Office of Education. IV. The Proposal to extend the benefits of Title I for another year and the benefits of Titles II and III to both the Indian Schools and the DOD Schools lreselits us with a dilemma. These are federal schools and should be supported to the fullest extent by the respective Departments. Including them in the legislation providing funds for schools operated in local school districts reduces the funds available for local use. However, any legislation that benefits large nuitibers of American children cannot be opposed until the basic problem has been resolved. We would repeat our suggestion of last year that the Congress appoint a corn- iiiittee to study the needs of the children enrolled in the B.I.A. schools-a study similar to the excellent one of the P.0.1). schools made by a sub-committee of this committee. V. We have supported, and continue to support, the National Teacher Corps as an innovative experimental programs to provide teachers for urban and rural scl~ols with large concentration of children from low-income families. We holieve that the transfer of this program from the higher Education Act to the Elenicntarv and Secondamv Education Act is a wise and constructive action. \l':As support of the prugrali is based on the principle of assisting school dis- trots with large numbers (if disadvantaged children to secure highly qualified taIlors. `We believe that the amendments proposed in HR 6230 are sound. 1. The anienclii~eiit ~ intern i'einiburseinent is valid. 2. State agency alq)roval is vital. (`Ia rit'ying tb local (1 iitrol Irovision as provided in Sec. 11 ~ is essential. 4. Authorizing the Teacher Corps to accept gifts is proper. The inclusion of programs for migrant children are valid improvements- lrvided the appropriate state education agencies' approvals are secured. We questimi the advisability (if including the federally operated Indian si (Is in the Tea her (`ups i rogramn. Improvement of the R.I.A. schools is a to(leral respnsibilitv that should be met by direct appropriation. ( See at- tO (`hed survey. VI. The amendments relating to education of the handicapped prompt a mixed rectimi. The NEA is very much in favor of expanding federal incentives to the states for education of exceptional children. lIo\vever, these children should 1w served, with special supplementary serv- ices \vhem'e necessary, ~vithiii the aegis of the local public school systems in the states. There should he greatly increased appropriations to the states for as- sistaIIt'e to local schools to supplement state and local funds for education serv- ices for exceptional children. These funds should he in addition to Title I ESEA finds and not transfem'recl from the Title I appropriation. There should he add!- tiomial Title VI funds provided-in substantial amounts-for the education of the handicapped. In specific reference to the provisions in HR 6230 relating to the handicapped, ~ believe the proposal for Regional Resource Centers needs very careful con- sideratiori. If the purposes of Sec. 608 are carried out exclusively with institu- tions of higher education and state education departnients. or combinations of such, and not arranged with profit-making agencies we believe they can be useful. Expansion of the Captioned Films for the Deaf Program into an Instructional Media Program to include all handicapped children is a sound proposal. VII. With respect to the disaster relief amendments, we urge that they be extended as proposed in HR 6230. However, we believe there is need to consider some type of assistance for situations in which a local school or college facility is destroyed by a catastrophe which does not meet the definition of disaster. VIII. The need for substantial financial assistance to the states for school comistruction is still increasing. This is caused by constantly expanding enroll- PAGENO="0237" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATJON AMENDMENTS 11059 Ilients, and the fact that the purposes of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act cannot be achieved unless space and facilities keep pace with the program. Good teachers will continue to migrate to modern facilities in the suburbs as long as the slum school buildings, are overcrowded, unsafe, dimly-lit, evil-smelling, obsolete structures without space or equipment for creative teaching. We urge Congress to provide funds for school construction without further delay. We cannot subscribe to the premise that such a proposal is in conflict with the nation's defense needs. The cost of military defense, highway construi*- tion, exploration of outer space and stimulation of industrial development should not be borne by children of this nation. In conclusion may I say that the objective of YEA is to assist the Congress in improving the educational opportunities for all of our nation's children. But to achieve this objective, we believe that local and state control of education must be strengthened. Thank you. NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION, Wa$hington, D.C., May 3, 196G. lIon. CARL PERKINS, Chairman, General ~u bconimittee on Education, Rayburn Hou8e Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN PERKINS: We are concerned that the proposed amen d- Inents to Title II of P.L. 89-10, Sec. 203. although related to library resources would create serious administrative problems if made applicable to textbooks and instructional materials. Inclusion of these amendment,s tends to Over-empha size the library purpose of the Title. We continue to believe the textbook and instructional materials provision of this Title is of equal, if not more, value to clii id len. We support the increased funds for state and local administration of Title II. `We see no reason, however, to amend the Act, other thaii for increased adniin- istration funds, because of problems not inherent in the Act itself, but rather crea ted by faulty guidelines. In his testimony before your subcommittee, speaking officially for the Xational Edu('iitjoll Association 1)r. Adron Doran voiced our opposition to the l)roIsl~ed amendment to the Cooperative Research Act which would include Profit-making agell('ies under the benefits of the Act. This proposal provides that profit-mak-ing agencies may contract with the U.S. Office of Education for the training of educational research personnel. As our official testimony states, we see no necessity to further break the pattern of confining federal grants and contracts between the ~fflce of Education and the non-profit public and private institutions. organizations, and agencies. There is no evidence, as we see the situation, that the non-profit public and private institutions are not equal to the task of educating people in the field of research, if given the opportunity and necessary financing. We supported the original cooperative research act, and subsequent amend- ments, primarily because it provided opportunity to strengthen the progranis of higher educational institutions. We fear that including profi t-nna king a gencje.s in the Act for the purpose of training personnel will weaken the non-profit iii- stitutions in several ways. First, the training of educational research personnel should properly be car- ried on in `the Sante institution which trains other educational personnel, such as teachers, administ ratoi~, and other edu~tional supporting services I)ersonnel. The interaction of the disciplines which comprise the educational effort should be strengthened, rather than dissipated through assigning the research training function to a completely separate agency. The Cooperative Research Act was enacted for the purpose of strengthening the educational research function of higher education institutions. It was con- templated that educational research be done in the field, not he the FSOE it~elf. If this premise still stands, as we insist it must, then it is not necessary for the TJSOE to train research personnel. If the purpose of the amendment is merely to make it jsssihle for FSOE to contract for training of key Punch operators, and other suin-professionial conipu- ter specialists, then such provision should be made in the administrative budget of the USOD, not by au amendment to the cooperative research act. PAGENO="0238" 1060 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Second. if the intent of the amendment is to bring the computer type of re- search training and resources into the educational picture, this can better be ac- coinplished by contracts between the USOE and the non-profit institutions. These institutions can in turn, as the occasion warrants, purchase services from the conirnercial research firms. Such a system will keep non-profit educational in- stitutions in control of the programs. Profit-making agencies, with the well- financed public relations and promotional services available to them, can, and we have reason to fear, will "nierchandise" their programs, sound or not, in a way potentially dangerous to a balanced educational system. Third, since these firnis are in business to make a profit, we feel that the train- ing program they may offer, must necessarily be more expensive to the taxpayer than that offered by the public and private non-profit institutions. Fourth. we question the propriety of the U.S. Office of Education becoming directly involved in the training of research personnel. The USOE is an adminis- trative agency, not an educational institution, nor should it be. It is reasonable to assume that many of the problems which have arisen with P.L. 89-10 are related to the lack of understanding on the part of some USOE personnel of the structure of the elementary and secondary school systems in the various states. Researchers can greatly influence the subject with which they are concerned. We do not believe that such influence should emanate from the Office of Educa- tion through personnel trained by non-education oriented, commercial profit- niaking agencies. Finally, the profit-making agencies can and do lure away the most competent faculty members from the non-profit institutions-to the detriment of the whole (-(lucational process-by offering higher salaries. We have seen this happen in seience and mathematics. We do not want it to happen to professional educa- t ion. The language in the present cooperative research act, provides for limiting the grants and contracts for training personnel to public and private non-profit in- stitutions, agencies, organizations. For these reasons we urge the Committee to reject this `amendment. Sincerely yours. JOHN XE. Li~rr~y, Director, Division of Federal Relations. Chairman PERKINS. If the members have had the time to read it they may just w-ant to ask quest ions. Give us your evaluation of the present elementary and secondary education. Mr. LFMLEY. Mr. Pueinski asked the question earlier, if there was any evaluation. We have to give the evaluation which is subjec- tiV('- Chairman PERTcTNS. Give us the results of your study. Mr. L~MLEY. We say there the program has had a great impact on education, title 1, particularly. (`hairman P1:nKTxs. Does your statement today spell that out? Mr. LUMLEY. Yes. You see, this w-as necessary because of the fact that many districts with limited financial resources could enter into the things they knew they should do for the disadvantaged. This made it possible for them to move into programs that people had to meet with compensatory education. We had other groups that were stimulated to do things which possibly had not gwen enough thought to this. You will find in your statement we give von three categories. Chairman PERKINS. From your organization studies have you been able to come up with any j~ositive results that are obtained as a result of title 1? Mr. LUMLEY. I would have to say to you, Mr. Chairman, at the moment that our i'esearch division is in the process of surveying dis- tricts and we will make this available to you as soon as it is complete. Chairman PERKINS. I would like to have that information when it is available. PAGENO="0239" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1061 Mr. LFMLEY. We will certainly he glad to do that. I know Mr. Scheuer mentioned the evaluation studies that have been made and the Office of Education also has material that I think should lie included here that will show the success of the ESEA. Chairman PERKINS. I know all of us support a general Federal aid program, but from your studies if we did not strive in the. right clirec- tlon when we came up with the categorical approach, insofar as zero- ing in on the most disadvantaged areas that iieeded specialized educa- tional programs the worst. Mr. L~TMLEY. The answer is yes, Mr. Chairman, because as you know the National Education Association has been an advocate of general Federal aid for many years, but at the same time to accomplish some- thing for the districts we moved into sup~)ort of this program and we believe, therefore, that 11.11. ~230 as proposed generally should be continued. I think the main thing that. I would like to say to you is that the program should be exteiided for 5 years, not for 1 year. Let's get authorization so that. we don't have to come back each year and talk about this. We can talk about the improvements, but generally, let's extend Public Law 89-10 for a 5-year period. Chairman PERKINS. I think if there is any one thing this committee should do, during the present session of Congress, it is to try to un- press the Congress with the helter-skelter way that planning is being carried on at the local educational agencies throughout the Nation simply because we do not have any stability in a. program of some duration. They just don't know how to plan and they cannot plan local educational programs. I am hopeful we call follow your suggestions. maybe not for 5 years, but at least 2 years, in the future so that local educational agencies can plan and I am hopeful we can impress the Appropriations Committee this year on the floor of the necessity of an early appropiration and that the authorization will be there so that the appropriations can be made early. I am most hopeful that during this present session that we can get that impression across on the floor of the House and let the Congress know just how many of time programs-the whole educational pro- grams-are being handicapped throughout the Nation because of an authorization with some duration and because of the lack of early appropriations. I think that is most important and every witness who has appeared before this committee has just preached that point continuously. Mr. LUMLEY. I think I should say that the Appropriations Com- mittee of course, n~ds education just as we all need education be- cause this is probably tile first time t.hat we had a piece of legislature that was tied so closely to the school district. This bill is tied tightly to tile fiscal year and just as tile men who preceded me, and tile man from the Bureau of Indian Affairs, testified that they could not get started until February because of tile appropriations. Chairman PERKINS. I)o your studies reveal or disclose that the effects of t.he program, tile way it is being administered at the. local educational areas, are reaching those areas of tile greatest need as was originally contemplated by this act, particularly the title I? Mr. LUMLEY. Yes, generally this is true. I am sure we will find some cases- PAGENO="0240" 1062 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDtTCATION AMENDMENTS Chairman PERKINS. Would you make available for the record what studies you have on this point? Mr. L~MLEY. There is one other thing I would mention when we are talking about appropriations and we believe it is important, that there be. full funding of the authorizations, too. Chairman PERKINS. You are recommending to this committee as a national organization that we extend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act for a period of 5 years, is that correct? Mr. LUMLEY. That is right. Chairman PERKINS. In its present form? Mr. LUMLEY. That is right. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Bell. Mr. BELL. It is a real pleasure to welcome you to the committee. I just have a couple of questions here. First.. what. about teachers' salaries? WTould improvement occur in teacher-pupil ratio or just, what would you emphasize with the Teacher Corps ? Where would be your emphasis? Mr. L~MLrY. If von are going beyond Public Law 89-10 or amend- ments 6960 that we are talking about, then I would say, Mr. Bell, the category we find there is the greatest need is in school construction. You will fiwl that this is in our testimony, where we say that this should receive the attention of the Congress at the earliest possible time. Mr. BELL. You would place this above funds for increased teach- student ratios? Mr. LUMLEY. Are we talking about a general aid program, or what? Mr. BELL. I am talking about a general aid program. In this cate- gory what would you emphasize? Mr. LUMLEY. W'e need not only school construction, but. we need funds for teacher salaries, and I am not talking about increased salaries. Mr. BELL. If you had so much money, where would you place i-our emphasis? Mr. LUMLEY. I am not trying to evade the question, but this would vary by school districts or by States. Mr. BELL. I appreciate that, but in your studies of the problem where do you think the biggest problem exists throughout the Nation? Mr. Ltl\ILEY. A national problem. I would still say school construc- tion comes first. And if you take school construction money and as- sist school districts, this makes money available for the increased needs of teachers' salaries. I am talking about the need to increase the number of teachers in addition to increasing the salaries of the individual teachers alrea dv employed. Mr. BEr~L. One problem that has concerned us is that teachers have been leaving, when you place them into private areas, they have a. ten- dencv to leave. I suppose there. are several things that cause this problem, one of which being protection of the teachers and another could be construc- tion, too. Iii view of this, getting back again to the general versus categoricaL would von still favor general aid or categorical aid to deal with this situation? Do von still think the argument. would be better for a general aid program than for a. categorical for those conditions? PAGENO="0241" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTJCATION AMENDMENTS 1063 Mr. LFMLEY. We are taking the position, and have taken the posi- tioii since Public Law 89-10 started, that the categorical aids should he increased and improved and you should add school construction to it. We will eventually get to a general aid bill. The Federal Government has to provide the funds to do these things that are of prime impor- tance to the school districts. I am in hearty agreement with the program that we have will even- tually evolve into a general aid program where the Federal Govern- ment provides a reasonable share of the operating costs of the school districts to do the things that you normally do in the school. But the Federal Government has not moved into that position yet. Timitil then we have to continue these programs. Mr. BELL. Still, right now you favor the categorical approach and a greater increase in the categorical approach: is that correct? Mr. LPMLEY. I am just being realistic, Mr. Bell. I want to get all the programs we can get and the most money we can get. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Bradernas. Mr. BRADEMAS. I have just a few general questions and I will be very brief. I am glad to see you, Doctor~ and your colleagues. First of all, I ta.ke it a fair reading of the results of this very inter- esting questionnaire that you have undertaken on the Teacher Corps would be that there is very widespread support among local school prii~cipals and superintendents for the corps: is tlìat correct Mr. LFMLEY. That is correct. I will ask Mr. McFarland to com- ment., because he is the man who has directed the study. Mr. MCFARLAND. Yes, that is true, Congressman Brademas, from the results we have received. Mr. BRADE3IAS. I am struck especially by the absence of any very trenchant or widespread criticisms from the. local level, although I guess probably half a dozen times during these hearings I have sought to hear any general criticism of the Teacher Corps from teachers or principals or superintendents. Arid I have. been asking this question for about 2 or 3 weeks now, and I have, vet to hear anything. I would like to turn to one other general area. only, and that is with respect to your criticisms on page 5 of operation of title. III. I will be very frank, Dr. Lumley. to say it. myst.ifies me that von should plump for 75 percent of title III funds being operated through the State departments of education and the rest through the Commis- sioner. And I will tell you why, and maybe you can resl)ofld. Wrhere have the State departments of education been all these. years, if these a.re such wonderful programs and if they are so good the State depart- ments are anxious to take control of them, where have they been hid- ing? Mr. LLThILEY. The money was not available to them at. the State level. Mr. BRADEMAS. There is always State money available. They can always put up State money. I don't. recall any State department of education leaders lobbying with their State legislatures for State money to carry out supplemental services and centers of the kind title ITT authorizes. Mr. LLMLEY. This kindi of foundation pmgi~ I think, was clone in- New York State. That is the only State I can think of. 4S2- 67-pt. 2-16 PAGENO="0242" 1064 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. BRADEMAS. One out of 50? Mr. LETMLEY. That. is right. It was done by foundation operation. Let me make this general comment, Congressman, and that is I be- lieve that the Congress did the school people a big favor when they enacted ~9-10, because it stimulated us to do the things that we knew we should do. I was a superintendent of schools. We knew we wanted to do these things, but we went on doing the same things and getting nionev from a State legislature which is not always the easiest thing to (10. Here von are stimulated to do things. and we are saving title III is a ~oo(l program. but we want to strengthen State departments, and therefore let.~s take a portion of title III, I won't quibble over 75 per- cent. and let the State department get the consultants and the readers auicl decide that they are good projects for Indiana or Illinois. Mr. BRADEMAS. I am strongly in favor of support of State depart- ments of education and I moved to double the administration's pro- posal for title. V. so I am on your side. But if we adopted your 75-25 percent. proposal, I can predict w-hat would happen iii my State and most of the States. You would have the most intense competition on the. part of local school superintendents who are as profoundly sus- picious of the States, as it is represented the States are of the Federal Government. wanting to get their hands on that 25 percent. We on this committee would be made the targets of the most in- tolerable lobbying activity by local school superintendents who would be saying "We w-ould much rather deal with the Office of Education rather than the State department of education, because they are not yet strong enough to give us the thoughtful, perceptive, innovative counsel that we think is important if these programs are not to become controlled by outmoded St ate bureaucrats." I put that in the form of a rhetorical question. How do you re- spond to that? Mr. LUMLEY. I think this 25 percent, and this is what we are saying there. 25 percent on the 1)asis that. there are national objectives that the Commissioner may have in mind but should not. be related to one State against another. Mr. BRADEMAS. You are aware at the present time the State depart- ments provide recommendations on tit.le III, are you not? Mr. LFMLEY. Yes. Mr. BRADEMAS. Are you familiar with the study Dr. Miller dis- cussed with us last week that indicated Sta.te departments of education turned their backs and provided almost no leadership to title III proiects? Mr. I~ii~y. Yes. The. defense that is given by the commissioners ot' State superintendents is that. the decisions are made at Washington without. relationship to their recommendations, so there was no point iii it. Mr. BRADEMAS. I don't know that that is accurate, Mr. Lumley. I base my observations on the facts as reported by the only significant survey of title III projects out in the field t.hat I know of. Mr. LUMLEY. That is right: it is the only one. Mr. BRADEMAS. The facts show that. for the most part, I think the figures show about 85 percent, if not more of the programs submitted by local school authorities have won the approval of State departments PAGENO="0243" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTJCATION AMENDMENTS 1065 of education and that there has been very little evidence of conflict between the local and State departments and U.S. Office of Education. Are you aware of that, Dr. Lumley? Mr. LUMLEY. This is true, but where you said they had exercised leadership, the thing I am saying in some State departments the report-and I think the survey bears this out-the State departments have just approved everything and sent it on in. Mr. BRADEMAS. rfhe (lont. have to do that. Is there no leadership there Mr. LtTMLEY. rue decision niacle at the Federal level (Toes not take into account the recommendation of the. State department. In other words, the State recommendation is there. Mr. BRADEMAS. I would beseech you to study Dr. Miller's volumi- nous report with very great care and, as Cromwell said, ~Consider ye ~vliether ye may not be mistaken." \[i~. LUMLEY. If the pressure is over the Congress to reduce the pres- sure, we still believe fundamentally this does provide a means for strengthening the State department by giving them a part, a decision pai~t, in the title III program. not. a recommendation part. Mr. BRADEMAS. You still have a very significant role if you want to have in reviewing recommendations without a mandatory veto. What do we say when a local school superinthndent comes along and says- I know the State department of education in New York, but we don't live iii New York, we live in-and fill in the blank and you l~iow what I am talking about. I am almost reminded of Walter Lippmann's argument back in 1959 for electing a Republican President: namely, that the Republican Party was in such a state of disrepair that the only way to enable them to survive was to thrust the responsibility of the White House on them. I am a little dubious about the validity of that kind of argument. Mr. BELL. I have one more question for you. Doctor. I am wonder- ing. I didn't hear, perhaps you have been asked this question. Has your association taken any position on the transfer of Headstart to the Commissioner of Education? Mr. LUMLEY. There is no official position taken by the NEA. This is (lone only by the delegate assembly. The Legislative Commission discussed it and it is the position of the commission and staff that Head- start is far more than an educational program and therefore we have to- Chairman PERKINS. You have not taken any position? Mr. LUMLEY. In other words, we are not saying to you that we want to transfer Headstart~ to the Office of Education. We are saying that Ileadstart involves health and welfare in addition to education. Mr. BELL. You did favor the transfer of adult education? Mr. LTJMLEY. Yes, sir; because this was a regular school program and part. of the educational operation. ITeadstart is far more than a. kindergarten program. Mr. BELL. Of course, Dr. Lumley, you know in the deprived area the Headstart has to be more-and so do first., second, and third grades-often more than strictly an educational program. There are a lot of things involved. I wanted to l)Omt out on the educational commission there have been additional programs under Headstart that came under the school system. PAGENO="0244" 1066 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDtCATION AMENDMENTS The Commissioner test ified there were three primary programs under the prime educational system now than under Headstart; so I would like von to again give some thought to this. Mr. LvMLEY. In answer to this, Mr. Bell, let. me say it would be the belief, I am sure the belief, of the NEA and NEA Legislative Corn-. mission that eventually the Headstart program should be transferred to the Office of Education or HEW, whichever would be the logical place. But. we do not. believe at the present time, when we have the programs being operated in the disadvantaged areas by other than school systems that are making a contribution, that they should be in- terrupted. We have to provide for a transfer that will not interrupt this kind of an operation. Mr. BELL. There are of course~ many reasons why I think it. should he transferred, but if you keep it. separate you could have a situation where the preschool and primary education of a child stops right there and you could go on living in the second t.hird. I would like you to reconsider this position. Mr. L~MLEY. The position I am reporting to you as of this time involves money. involves building, involves the construction, involve.s State laws, involves a lot of things. So to say to you today that you should transfer Headstart to HEW, we do not believe would be real- istic. We do believe that eventually the Headstart program should be in the Office of Education. Mr. BELL. For now, I guess, that will take. care of it. Chairman Priucixs. Mr. Ford. Mi-. FORD. I think your statement. of the position of the National Education Association on Headstart. is very interesting because Ed- ward Fuller, without equivocation, put your organization on record in front. of this committee as being not only for the. immediate transfer of the program. but. of the functions, to the public schools. I hope that readers of this record will read your statement in con- junction with Dr. Fuller~s, and I intend to call it to a number of people's attention. You and your organization long have been sup- porters of Federal aid to education, and participated in all of the steps tha.t lead up to the ultimate success that Chairman Perkins had in the passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. With your knowledge of the pressures that have emerged from time to time and apropos of our previous discussions of what might happen to ITeadstart. if it. becomes purely an educational program, do you believe we could have passed the Elementary and Secondary Edu- cation Ac.t if we did not have the specific legislation that only public schools could administer programs? Could we have passed the bill without those restrictions? Mr. L~rr~y. No. Mr. FORD. `Ion have recommended here authorizations for more than 1 year. Last year I must confess that I was reluctant to go along with the 3-year authorization, because I thought if we kept the authori- zations down to 2 or 1 year we would maintain control of the program in this committee. After hearing the Secretary of HEW and the Commissioner of Ed- ucation testify this week, I discovered that this committee has lost control of this legislation. Even with a 2-year authorization. It is PAGENO="0245" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1067 presently their stated plan-it is on the record of this committee-to ~o before the Appropriations Committee handling our legislation anti ask for an overall appropriation for this bill which represents 49 per- cent of the funds that we authorized last year in the second year of the f~-vear authorization. ~For this reason, so long as the Budget Bureau is going to play games like this with us, and the administration is taking this weakened approach to the support. of education this year, I think that other members might join me on this committee in resisting anything but year-to-year authorization. Anti I hope you will understand there are i inportant reasons for resisting rnultiyear authorizations without (iiSagreemg with the very cogent. and good reasons you give for the long-term program. We appreciate the great burden we have placed on local school people and State departments of education by not giving them enough leadtime to know what to expect. I really don't know what is going to happen when we have to go back and tell some school district.s that not only are we not going to give them the authorizat.ion we passed last year-promised them-but we are going to give them less than they got last. year. We have already seen the tragic results on the poverty program of cutting back under the guise of holding the line after we have once kindled the spirit, of the local district. I am fearful of the effect that this kind of funding might have anti I would just like to ask you whether you have an indicatioii in your organization of what the reac- tion might be. of school people around the country, who have under- taken programs in reliance upon these authorizations, if we fail to fund at least enough money to meet the fornmla change that we have made. ~ LUMLEY. It is just begmning to happen, and they are just beginning to realize it anti there is consternation among the schools that have these programs. They were looking forward to more and now they are finding in most instances they are having less money. Let me say, Congressman, I realize that your idea. of a 1-year author- ization is to put the pressure on t.he Appropriations Committee. But I am not. too Sure that. this is going to be successful. It. is our feeling that. it. should be longer, and let us, instead of com- ing now each yea.r and saying to you tha.t these are the things we need, just let. us go to the Appropriations Committee and say it. Mr. FORD. I want t.o make it clear that I am no longer enamored of a 1-year authorization. I am not sure it would make much difference, b~~t I am convinced trying to have this committee, which spends so much time talking to educators across the country determine what our Teal needs are, determine what our real needs down the road 5 years, would be an exercise in futility. In good conscience I could not. slip- port your proposal for a 5-year authorization because I don't think it. means a.nything. Mr. MCFARLAND. Several weeks ago, the U.S. office sent out. final allocations for title I to counties and local school districts and we are get.t.ing feedback already that a number of school districts are actually receiving less money, as the result. of the final allocations, than they had for the last year. PAGENO="0246" 1068 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS I think the reaction to this is going to, as Dr. Lumley stated, bring home the point, that with less than half or about half of the money needed for next year being proposed in the budget will bring this point home even more. Mr. FORD. My understanding is the final allocation works out to about 73 percent. of the authorization last year and what we are now talking about is fully funded which nobody really thinks will happen, is 49 percent of the request. from the Office of Education. They are, of course, responding to the pressures of the Budget Bureau in doing this. One further question on title ITT. We have had testimony from a~ number of State school offices and local superintendents from large cities and smaller communities, the tenor of which is they would prefer to have the State office, as you have suggested, have greater say in the movement of title ITT but generally they would go to the point of letting a State office veto a program they did not feel should be funded. At the same time, however, they have all, and I say "all," insisted that the local school districts and the State offices are presently co- operating beautifully. that they have heard there are problems but in their State it. works fine. That is not a very persuasive way to convince us that we ought to change the program when everybody tells us they want a change but it is working fine. One of the things that was raised, however, by a couple of super- intendents was the problem of the State office having absolute ap- proval power, whether it. is 75 percent or 25 percent. or 50 percent. you suggest in your testimony here that 75 percent he handled this way. At least one superintendent, I believe from San Diego, Calif., indicated that he felt. even though they had marvelous cooperation in their State that once the authority resided in the State office of education, the pressure would then come from all over the State to consider applica- tions on some. sort of a formula. to equalize the distribution of funds in northern California, southern California, big cities, small cities. We would thus start spreading the money out. instead of considering whether individual title ITT programs were of sufficient size to really demonstrate the validity or lack of validity of any innovative approach to education. The second point that was raised was the possibility that by giving approval t.he authority to States would lead to more duplication than when you have a central office that. might recognize that there are several programs trying a particular thing in one State and there- fore than another State ought to be concentrating on a different sort of anproach. Would von comment on these two points of view with respect actually to the. disagreement with your suggestion? Mr. LTMLEY. A copy of the project goes to the State. department where it. is reviewed and a recommendation is made hut it then goes to the O~ce of Education where it is reviewed by the staff readers or consultants. A recommendation is made and then a decision made in lVashington. It. is our fee1in~'r that innovation in California i~ not necessarily innovation in Alabama. This may be taken care of over here. but PAGENO="0247" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTCATION AMENDMENTS 1069 von have different people reading different things so what we are saying is let's come bac.k to the State department and give them a share of this and let them get the consultants and the readers and make the decisions. The first part of your comment, Congressman, I would say is cov- ered by the regulations or guidelines that the Commissioner would set up for the State to follow. Mr. Fo~. Is there evidence that there is any substantial number of title III project.s being approved by the U.S. Office after they have been rejected or recommended against by the State office? Mr. LUMLEY. A very small percentage. Mr. Forw. Actually, there is not really too much difficulty in terms of numbers at this point. Mr. LUMLEY. That is right. Mr. Foiw. There was a second point raised in 1965 when we held hearings on this bill originally, and one of the people who forcefully brought this before the committee was the president of MIT. He sug- gested if title III were permitted to become a State program directed by the State office of education, that. some of our large private colleges and universities who had a very direct interest in becoming involved in partnership with school districts and otherwise in these title III programs would be in a less favorable position to obtain grants when they competed against., for example, a State owned and operated uni- `versity. There was considerable testimony that supported him com- ing from institutions like MITT that. they would rather compete with the State university at the Office of Education than at the State capital, State politics being what they are. Do you think that would still be a valid reason for our changing title III? Mrs. GEn~AU. I just wanted to ask the question. I don't anticipate an answer. I think it would be interesting if you could somehow find people who submitted title III projects and didn't get them approved awl see what their reaction was. I can tell you as a former chief State school officer, if I had no au- thority really except to read the thing, I wouldn't bother to make any discrimination. I would send them all in and let Mr. Howe take the heat. But. if I had the responsibility which they all should have whether they want it. or not. This makes them grow. They would have to make some decisions among the values and the purposes of the various title III applications submitted to them. They would have to make it and making the decision would make them stronger and bet- ter people. As it is, you are just cutting them out. I frankly admit all I would do would be to sign every one that came in and let IMIr. howe take. the heat.. Mr. LUMLEY. This is also the answer I would give you on MIT or the argument of the private college that they would not. receive the same considera.tion at the State level. They would get consideration, I am sure in most States, but if they didn't, let me say I am sure they would come back here to make sure that you knew about. it and that. something would be done. PAGENO="0248" 1070 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS The point we are trying to make is this: We see a gradual movement toward a federalization of school systems. What we are trying to say is that. the school systems of the country are controlled by the States. The one thing that we have said is that the reason we have such a great educational system in the United States is that we have 50 sys- tems. We dont have a commissioner of education like in France who can take out his watch and say every child in every schoolroom is doing this, this, and this at this minute and this hour. We recognize there are weak State. departments. As Mr. Brademas said, your committee provided funds to strengthen these departments. Now, you don't strengthen them if you don't let them do anything. You have to give the State agency the power to do something. This is what we are saying to you in one other section on 5(b) where von are proposing that you establish another agency. You already have enough agencies in the State now. Mr. FORD. I have not heard any member of the committee speak up for 5(b). Mr. LTJMLEY. This just came to mind. Mr. FORD. There is another consideration, however, and that is in the testi1flony in 1966. One. of the most frequently articulated frustra- tions that we were getting from local superintendents was their in- ability to get clear-cut guidelines out. of the title I offices in their states and their inability to get those applications processed expedi- tinuslv after they filed them. In my own State, the conditions have been absolutely atrocious. WTe are going to P~Y for that in our State this year because we spent a little over 80 percent. of the money we were allotted last year because the Federal Go\-ernment was slow in appropriating the money, the State office was slow in getting its guidelines out and in processing the title I applications and all of these steps accumulated to make it diffi- cult for the local school- Chairman PERKINS. Would the gentleman yield to the gentleman from California ii\lr. BELL. Are von finished with that particular question? Mr. Fo~. Yes: I guess so. Mr. BELL. My question goes to another problem, Dr. Lumley. You are quite familiar with the goings-on in California. I am con- ceriie.d about one thing in teacher training and things of this kind; I have heard the complaint, made that a lot of these programs that come up, not necessarily FederaL but seem `to go to the universities, the University of California and its nine divisions, whereas they seem to bypass the very area tha.t is particularly a department in this par- ticular field and that might. be the State colleges. have you found this to be true in California? The.re is this point to the effect that the universities seem to get `the job~ so to speak. in many fields that perhaps the State colleges are better qualified `to do. Is this something you would find as a criticism? Mr. LI~-MLEY. Yes; we have heard this criticism, Mr. Bell, about the teacher institute program. The State departments don't have any- thing to do with it, so in this instance what we are saying now could not 1)e true because the school that has the desire to run an institute for reading teachers makes an application to the Federal office and gets approval for the operation of a summer program. PAGENO="0249" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1071 Mr. BELL. Why is that? Do you think it is the prestige of being a university? Mr. LUMLEY. Why the universities get it over the State colleges? Mr. BELL. Yes. Mr. LUMLEY. I would assume this is true and would be the reason for it but, as I say, in the teacher institute program this would not be true. The teacher institute would not be true because in many in- stances it is the very small schools. Mr. BELL. I am having difficulty hearing you. As far as teacher institute programs, then you think it is not true. Mr. LUMLEY. It is not true with teacher institute programs. Mr. BELL. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Ford. Mr. FORD. I think the gentleman would agree with me that the com- petition is involved there and I would like to see what Stanford Uni- versity would have if the University of California came in at the same time, recognizing that you have a State school board or State school officer responsible for deciding between the two of them. I just shudder to think what would happen to the University of Detroit in competition with the University of Michigan. I don't know any politicians in my close acquaintance who would dare favor a Jesuit school over the University of Michigan. As long as we are going to win football games. nobody is going to turn down a PpT ic at ions. (hairman PERKINS. The committee will recess until 1 :15. (Whereupon at 12 :25 p.m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at 1 :15 p.m. of the same day.) AFTER RECESS (The committee reconvened at 1 :15 p.m., Representative Carl D. Perkins. chairman of the committee, presiding.) Chairman PERKINS. The committee will come to order. Mr. Eshleman, do von care to direct any questions to the National Education Association, Division of Federal Relations, represented by Mr. John Lumley in the center? Of course, you were not here. Any questions? Mr. ESHLEMAN. Mr. Chairman, I have not had enough time to see his statement. I may have questions later on. Mr. LUMLEY. IVe are fellow Pennsylvanians. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Erlenborn. Mr. ERLENBORN. I just came in, Mr. Chairman, and I have not had an opportunity to review Dr. Lumle's statement. Chairman PERKINS. Have the effects and results obtained been as great as your organization anticipated from your best evaluations? Mr. LL-MLEY. The answer is yes, Mr. Chairman. As I said this morning, our evaluation has to be quite subjective at this time but on the basis of the re.ports that we have we. believe that it has had a tre- mendous impact on education in the eountr. IVe believe it has done the thing that the committee wanted it to do when it was enacted and. of coui~se, as you know, we congratulated this committee a munber of times for taking this great forward step. PAGENO="0250" 1072 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS For the~ benefit of Mr. Erlenhorn and Mr. Eshlernan, let me say that the one. thing that we pressed for this morning was longtime authoriza- tion so that the school districts can plan. We also brought to the. attention, which I assume every school super- iiitendent is bringing to your attention, the fact that the appropriation system of the Federal Congress does not coincide with the fiscal school year, and this creates a problem for schools. rrI~erefore, you have to have two things: You have to have authori- zation so you can plan and we, as educators, now have to work on the Appropriations Committee to educate them to the fact that we have a new problem. SO-b is the first time that we have ever really created the problem of having to appropriate money from the Congress to meet. a fiscal school year. I think as the members of the Appropria- tions Committee become aware of this they in turn will be more svnipathet ic. Mr. ERLENBORN. Will the chairman yield? Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Mr. ERLENBORN. I have a question or two. I notice on the first page of your statement, Mr. Lumley that you say after only 2 years there have already been major impacts on the scope and quality of American education. I)o you think that we presently have a yardstick by which we can measure this impact? Mr. LFMLEY. No. sir. In title I. for instance, we believe that the impact has been different in different school districts. There has been a tremendous impact in some school districts. It was brought out by some witness this morning that school districts title I timds have been used to a degree as welfare funds, not educa- tiotial funds. Mr. EnLENBORN. Do von think in the near future we will be able to 4Te vise means of again making a subjective assessment of whether we are getting the value from this program that we should? Mr. LFMLEY. I personally would hope the national assessment program that is being conducted will give us at least a base from which we can start and that we can move from that to a program which von are providing for in 6230 State evaluation which will set up some system of evaluation within the States. It is absolutely essential to give the State money and the opportunity to plan an evaluation program because unless we do this, I think the Congress can say this is not good enough. Mr. ERLENBORN. You recognize it is incumbent upon the education- al community to come in with this assessment if you are to convince Congress to carry this program along. Mr. LrMLEY. No question about it at all. Mr. ERLENBORN. One problem that relates to Headstart is, I under- stand, at. least. in my State of Illinois, there is no way of identifying in the public school system those children who have participated in Head- start. The State superintendent of public instruction tells me he can- not get. this information. How will it. then be possible in the first, second, or third grade to tell whether these Headstart. pupils have benefited from the Head- start. program if you are not able to identify them? PAGENO="0251" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1073 Mr. LUMLEY. Obviously the answer is that you could not do any- thing that can't be identified. The law required the Office of Economic Opportunity or the Heaclst.art program to be coordinating with the Office of Education so that these programs would be coordinated and information would be available. If it is not, then it has fallen down somewhere along the line. Mr. ERLENBOTiN. I don't know if it is a iiiatter of weakness in the law or the execution. Mr. LUMLEY. I don't know either. Mr. ERLENBORN. I am given to understand that this information is not made available to the local school districts or the State super- intendent as to which children participated in Headstart and which did not. In anot.her area I notice that you are not happy with the idea of de- centralization of the Office of Education. As I read this in your statement you would rather not have this carried on to its full implementation. If the local regional office of the Office of Education were given the power to make final decisions rather than be just another administrative layer between the school districts and the State departments and the Office of Education, would you. still feel the same way? Mr. LUMLEY. Yes, because title I projects are now approved by the State departments. You see, philosophically what we are saying is that we want to strengthen State departments of education and we be- ieve that if the Office of Education is dealing directly they are oniy dealing with 50 State departments. To set up nine regional offices, even though you give the regional office the power of decisionmaking, it is our content ion that you develop an inflexible system because of the fact. that the first year region A may do something and region B do something just slightly different under time same rules and regulations. Therefore, the rules and regulations have, to be tightened so that e~erybody makes the same decision. The result is that moving the decision from the Office of Education out here to regional offices will not. continue innovations. Iii other words, because the thing works in California does not mean it. is going to work in Illinois. This is our content.ion. But we do say that the State department of education in Illinois has knowl- edge of Illinois and they will make decisions on this basis. It. is not going to help Illinois because the regional office is-I assume will be-in Chicago. Maybe Illinois is not a good illustration because you will be too close to it.. Take Michiga.n, it is not going to help Michigan any to have a regional office in Chicago. They might as well come to Washington is the J)oint I am trying to make. It is our belief that the 50 States are responsible for the educational programs. The Federal Government is a partner. But the Federal Government should be the partner through the 50 States, not by setting up another layer here or not by going directly from Washington to the school district.. ~1r. ERLENBORN. To paraphrase what you say, the difficulties that. time Office of Education now has in administering these categorical aid programs is that they are not structured to go through the State departments of education. PAGENO="0252" 1074 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS This is why decentralization might appear to be necessary. You would feel rather than to adapt the Office of Education to the categorical aid programs you should adapt or adopt the programs to- so that they can flow through these State departments? Mr. L~MLEY. That is right. The categorical aid programs can go through the State departments without any change, without this regional organization. Mr. ERLENBORN. Am I also right in assuming you would like to see the phasing out of the categorical aid programs and phasing out- phasing in of block grants or tax sharing, some general aid to educa- tion rather than categorical aid. Mr. L~MLEY. Our feeling is that eventually the categorical aid going through the State departments does lead you to a. general or block grant. program. That is correct.. Mr. ERLENBORN. Along the same lines you are no doubt aware that there are some proposals to create a department of education separate from HEW, to raise the Office of Education to departmental status~ It occurs to me that the apparent need for this gain is the fact that we have so many administrative details as a result of our categorical aid programs. Mv own personal feeling is that if we change the structure of the Office of Education to raise it to Cabinet status, because of the im- mense burden put on the Office of Education with the categorical aid programs in the last 6 to 10 years, we are in a way admitting that we have locked in categorical aid for the future, we are not going to move in the direction of general aid to education. Would you feel this might. be a legitimate observation? Mr. LrMLEY. I guess I have to answer that by saying that. the NEA has a resolution, adopted by its representative assembly, favoring the establishment of a department of education. Certainly I would also think you have some l)asis for your opinion. Mr. ERLENBORN. My inclination was to say, yes, when you see that the Office of Education has had a tremendous growth in the last few years with the burdens we have put~ on it. It now is a large going concern but. I think it is a result again of the categorical aid programs. I think if we do create it. as a separate department we are taking the tack that. categorical aid is here to stay. Mr. LT~\ILEY. Incidentally I was going to say that. our resolution favoring the Department, of Education was passed by the representa- tive assembly before. the Office of Education became as large as it is. It was passed basically on the fact that~ education should be an im- poi'tamit. ftmction of the Federal Government. Mrs. Gereau is a former State commissioner of education. I know she always likes to comment on operations of State departments. Mrs. GEREAU. I was sitting here nodding agreement with many of the things you said, Mr. Erlenborn. The point of strengthening State departments of education is not going to be achieved only by putting more money in title V-I think we should have more money in title. V-but. will be achieved best by giving them the responsibility, and the opportunity to do the things that they are legally constituted to (10, and seeing to it that they do them, and not setting up some other structure that can make it easy for them to say, all we do is just (us- tribute State funds and put on a few consultants and that is all. PAGENO="0253" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1075 This makes them in effect sort of minions of the Federal Govern- nient and this is wrong. Mr. EJiLENBORN. I like your observations along this line as to the (flect. of the regional educational labs. I will preface this by saying, in our study of the Office of Education we have found-and my ex- perience is limited but in the few places we went-there was a diver- gence of opinion as to the mission or responsibility of what the regional e(lucational labs might be. They seemed to think that. the principal mission was dissemimiation of iiiformat ion on a regional basis. These regions seemed to var. In the State of Pennsylvania, for instance, there are three different r(2-ional labs involved in one State. Is this in line with strengthening State departments of education or is this again breaking down the authority of the State departments of education, admitting we are moving toward a Federal system? Ani I wrong? Mr. LUMLEY. I have to concur with you. I think the regional labs have to be tied to t.he State departments. Otherwise you are breaking (lown again. If Pennsylvania has the need, if there is need for three regional labs in Pennsylvania, they certainly should be tied to the Pennsylvania Department of Education so that the department of education has a hand in this dissemination. Otherwise the dissemination may not be in accord with the policy of the State department. Mr. ERLENBORN. If the principal mission of the regional educational lab is the dissemination of information aren't they doing the job that the State department ought to be doing? Mrs. Gereau? Mrs. GEREAU. The answer is yes, sir. Mr. L~TMLEY. Yes. The answ-er is s-es, no hesitation on this. I think that a part of this is research, with the research going on. Again, if this should go through, dissemination of research, even if this is done in another area, should go in my opinion through the chan- nels set up by the State department of education, and I think philo- sophically what we are saying to you in all of our testimony is that we believe that the Federal Government has a major role to play in edu- cation because of the national needs and the fact that States and localities do not have access to the financial resources. But we believe that the operation and the control of the school should be at the State level. This is actually what. we are saying in every hit. of testimony, in our comments on all of 6320. Mr. ERLENBORN. Along a little different line, I sometimes wonder where the optimum point is in our financial support of education. Let me just relate to you the experience in my area. Our local governments in Illinois are financed principally, almost wholly, from the real estate tax, the property tax, real and personal iuoperty. In the county in which I reside, Dii Page County, Ill., about SO cents of every property tax dollar goes to education. This is the principal support of education in our area. Twenty-five years ago we started some State support of education and increasingly year after year a. larger proportion of the obligation of support of education was placed on tl1e State. PAGENO="0254" 1076 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDtCATION AMENDMENTS For instance, this year we will probably now increase our founda- tion level to $400. When I first went into the State legislature some 10 or 12 years ago it was $200 or less, $180 I think. Now in the meantime the Federal Government is beginning to de- vote more and more of these available tax dollars to education. St~Il the burden at the local level has not been reduced. We are still de- voting about 80 cents out of every tax dollar to the support of our edu- cation system. Where is the proper mix, where is the optimum? How much can the tax system support? Do you have any simple answer to that? Mr. L~rLEY. I dont have a simple answer to it. Let me say that our finance committee, the NEA Finance Committee, would say that the main problem of the financing of schools is that we have depended primarily on the property tax at the local school level. This has put an undue burden on property. It has also limited the financial resources for schools. As you says not only has it happened in Illinois, it has happened in every other State, it has moved to the State level to provide for foundation programs but it did not relieve that local property level. Of course we have to hasten to say that this is not~ true of all school districts. In some school districts certainly the property tax is not a heavy burden. It all depends on the kind of value there is. But generally, the increased enrollment, the increased need of education of boys and girls, the need to stay in school longer, has increased costs. Not only the elementary and secondary but the junior college, the college, and university are being funded. This has increased the cost of education and the Federal Government has had to move in. As I am sure you are aware, for a long time the National Education Asso- ciation argued that the best program was a general Federal aid pro- gram. a general support progmm where every boy and girl whether they lived in X district or V district V would have at least a basic education. The Congress decided in its wisdom that there were certain needs that were national needs. This moved us to the categorical aid in 1958 when the National Defense Education Act came along. As I say, this was a tremendous thing to school districts even though it~ was a matching program. Then for quite a while we could not move from that, for various rea- sons. until we~ got 89-10. This committee went to work and put together S9-10 which, as we see it subjectively, has done a tremendous jol). As I said this morning I think it is one of the best things that hap- pened to school people, 89-10. It shook us out of our lethargy too. As a superintendent of schools if you keep on doing the same thing over and over again your problems are great and you have in the back of your mind some of these things that you ought to do but you just don't get time or the State legislature does not have enough money to let you do it and it does not get done. 89-10 came along and here was a grand opportunity to take care of compensatory education for the people who are disadvantaged, the innovation in title III and title IT with its textbook and instructional materials. Title V we think has strengthened State department~. PAGENO="0255" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1077 The complete answer is the thing that you and I are talking about. And that is to give the State department the right, to make decisions. This can be done and sa.tisfy the control of the Congress because you L can review this every year by the regulations and the guidelines that are set up by the Commissioner. You don~t need nine regional offices or 385 more employees, or whatever the figure may be, to do this if you do this through the State departments. Briefly that is our story. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Eshleman. Mr. ESHLEMAN. Yes, I would like to ask Mr. Lumley one question if I may. Last week we heard testimony here that there should be more direct relations between the Office of Education and large school dis- tricts such as our larger cities and so on. Using our State as an ex- ample but there are other States whose State constitutions read similar to ours, when a State constitution gives education in that State solely to the State, as our does, does this raise in your mind not only in terms whether it is a wise thing to do educationally but is there not some doubt as to the constitutionality of the Office of Education dealing directly with the school district in the State of Pennsylvania and any other State whose constitution reads the same as ours Mr. LUMLEY. This is our feeling. It. would be our feeling also that. the relationship between the Office of Education whether it. is Phila- delphia or Pittsburgh should be through the departments. Mr. ESHLEMAN. The size in your mind has nothing to do with it.? Mr. LUMLEY. Has nothing to do with it. We believe that. if the dc- partment.s are made strong and they have to make these decisions, that. the problems of Philadelphia. and the problems of Pittsburgh will get the same consideration as the problems of Lancaster. I am firmly convinced that. there is no magic. for Philadelphia to come to \Vashing- ton; the decision can be made in Harrisburg. Mr. ESHLEMAN. That is the only question I have. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much, Mr. Eshleman. Mr. Meeds? Mr. ME~S. Thank von, Mr. Chairman. Dr. Lumley and Mrs. Gereau and Mr. McFarland, I am sorry I was not here to hea.r your testimony. I have had an opportunity to read your testimony, Dr. Lumley. I am particularly interested and concerned about. those sections of titles I, II, and III dealing with Indians and migrants. I noticed you touched on them in your testimony. I would just like to ask you. some general questions first.. It has been my observation and we were told before this committee last year or a subcommittee of this committee, that every effort would be made by the Department. of the Interior and Bureau of Indian Affairs t.o work toward that day when education of Indian children would be carried on as much as possible by school districts which abutted Indian reservations. I do not, see that any gigantic strides have been made in this direction by the Department of the Interior and the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Would you like to comment on that, sir? Mr. LUMLEY. Let. me say to you, as you said you read our section- Mr. MEED~. Right. Mr. LUMLEY. And this was soul searching because. last year we came up here and said that the Bureau of Indian Affairs might to do PAGENO="0256" 1078 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS certain things, but we have said to you here-well, the answer to your quest ion is "No," we can't see that anything has been done. Let me say to you, as you know, Mrs. Gereau is our expert on Indians and I am sure she will have more comment. This is the reason why we are. saving to you that the Congress should have a committee to study this as they did the DOD. Mr. MEEDS. You suggested last year as I recall that. a special, either a subcommittee of this committee or some special committee of Con- gress look into the problem of Indian education. In keeping with this, aiid perhaps I should direct my question to you, Mrs. Gereau, it. has been my observation that. in those schools systems and in those Indian reservations, all those Incliaii reservations in States such as my own where all the education is public education, that there is a great lack or resources from the Bureau of Indian Affairs to those Indians who are still on reservations and attending public schools. If I may I will give you an example. I have six Indian tribes, I have more than six Indian tribes but I have six full-fledged reserva- tions in my congressional district. There is one person from the Bureau of Indian affairs, who serves as a liaison with all of those tribes and all of the public institutions' agencies to go and talk with the Indian people, get them to attend school, talk to the parents, the stu- dents. This is wholly inadequate as I see it.. Yet under the bill as it. is presently written no money could be made available to that purpose unless it went directly to a Bureau of In- (ban Affairs school. Then is that your understanding and inter- l.)Ietation? Mr. Lt-MLEY. The bill provides for money to go to th~ Federal schools. That is right. Mr. MEEDS. I certainly intend to propose at least an amendment which will allow money under this title to be used by Indian tribes, or by the Bureau of Indian affairs, in the aid of students who are at- tending public schools in the States or abutting on reservations. Do you think that. would be at least a step in the right direction? Mrs. GEREAU. Most of the States that have a fairly large percent.- age of Indian children have been for many years assisted through an old bill we call the Johnson-O'Malley Act. This was the provision that. provided assistance to the States and through the States to the public school systems who made a special effort to get Indian children into the public school. Then later on Public Laws 814 and 874 were amended and made it very attractive to the public school to go out and seek the Indian chulciren. As a matter of fact in your State and mine and many others there were literally thousands of Indian children who for centuries should have been the responsibility of the Indian service whom they corn- pletely ignored, they w-ere wandering around on the prairies. It was not. imt.il they got the Public Law 874 and 815 that the public school went out and got the children. The Indian service schools, the number of them, was reduced rapid- lv at first when the Indians came under 815 and 874. All through the northwest. area that von and I are familiar w-ith, and Wisconsin, Florida. and Oklahoma and most of the Stat.es these children have now become part of the public schools. PAGENO="0257" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1079 A most interesting byproduct has been that the adult Indians are serving on school boards, they are even becoming active in the coin- munit.y. They are beginning to understand taxes, tax structure, and budgeting. This has been inadvertently a citizen education prograni for an adult but this was not the main purpose. In recent years tile Indian service has not provided adequate funds or not even asked for ade- quate funds under the Johnson-O'Malley Act which would take care of tile kinds of things you mentioned. It is a wide open act, you can do almost anything under it if you propose it.. Instead they have been building up tile Indian schools and now they are coining in and asking for more money out of ele- mentary and secondary education, which is based on a formula of c.ounting all children in the conlinunity, and then they are going to take another piece out of that and hand it over to the Bureau of Indian Affairs to give them special funds to operate with when they ought to get it out of the Interior budget. Mr. MEEDS. So certainly members of this committee are aware of the situation in regard to counting of the Indian children. It seems to met. that. their being counted in this instance should certainly enable them to make moneys available to consultants, counselors, and people who would in fact aid tile Indian children in those States like my own who are i~ot receiving very much benefit from this entire ~8 million whic.h we put into tile title I last year for tile education of Indian children unless they are going to a BIA school and not receiving any benefits. Mrs. GEREAU. If they are economically disadvantaged cilil(lrell like all the rest of the children in the community. Mr. MEEDS. Those that are going to be in BIA schools are being dealt with. Mrs. GEREAIIT. That is right. In other \vordls, your building into the bill incentives to keep the BIA in business when it should be get- ting out of business because it is operating segregated school systems, setting them apart. Mr. MEEDS. We talk about segregation and we know we have enough segregation which we are trying to prevent, but it. seems to me that efforts to improve tile BIA school, while it should be in those special areas in which they serve special education and not in the over- all field of-in effect promoting segregation. While it is true we ask for a beneficial effect, I doubt that it. has this effect in the long run. Would you care to comment on that? Mrs. GEREAf. I would just say yes to what you have said. I think separating the Indian children out from the regular curriculum the other chjldren follow in the State, which is what BIA does, of setting them apart, of making a premium of their lildianness rather thaii their disadvantaged state or the. fac.t. that they are ai~ American citizen, the primary determinant, is philosophically contrary to our principles in this country. One argument is that the people, the Indian people want it. `H `i-e are a lot of 11011-Indian people that would prefer to go to school v.:ith oiie group or another but that. is beside the point. Mr. MEEDS. On the other hand I a.m sure you will recognize as I do, that. there are some special points t.llat the Bureau of Indian Affairs 75-492--67----i,t. 2-1 7 PAGENO="0258" 1080 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS schools serve, particularly those residential schools in which there. have been family problems and where it has been necessary to separate the people from the pai~eital control, parei~tal atmosphere. Mr. LUMLEY. We agree that there are special problems and they must be met. As Mary has said, we would concur with you that there should be something that takes care of the Indians t.hat are in the public school operation and pull more of these out of the BIA school. Mr. MF.Er)s. Along the same lines, while it was not included in the statement, I must state that I am very much concerned about the situ- ation that occurs with regard to migrant education. You will recall we had grandiose plans under which-I have even forgotten the amount-somewhere around $10 million was put in title I for migrant education, and while this committee wrote that provision in and the House and Senate both passed it., the Appropriations Committee did such an act with it that the State of Washington, for instance, under our authorization which was to receive over a million dollars, ended up receiving S17.~.000 to cover the migrant education program which has not measured UI) anywhere near our expectations. Now in additjon migrant programs under the Office of Economic Opportunity have been functioning 1)ut it is my understanding that the education portion of these is to be taken out from t.he Office of Education-excuse me, the Office of Economic Opportunity in the budget of 19(~S and put in the Office of Education, but I have been unable to find where there has been a corresponding amount of money requested by the Office of Education for that. Have You people looked into that at all? Mr. LrMLEY. I think your observation is correct. I t.hink we are going to be up against the same thing we were when we transferred adult. education to the Office of Education. We transferred the pro- gram but we did not transfer the money. Mr. MEEDS. It seems to me this is sheer hypocrisy to talk about a program that needs to be talked about, like migrant education does and something done about. it. and then t.o shift-well, I think the De. partment of Education is the proper place for this. Just to give them authority without the money does not do a thing. Mrs. GEREAU. It makes it worse. Mi~. MFED~. It does cause concern that money is planned for pro- ~ran~ and there is ai(l reduction in the Office of Economic Opportunity bu(lget tlii~ year and we aie told some of these very fine migrant edu- cation 1)rO~1a1U5-that have been started-the Office of Economic 0p1)ortimitv will not be able to fund the educational portion of them this year. Mi~s. GEREAU. And neither will anybody else. Mr. MEEDS. No, because there is no money available for it. I a~iune von loin me in urging full funding not only of this bill but certainly of all those portions of any legislation touching on migrant e thu cation. Mr. Lv~urv. Yes. full funding of all, full funding of handicapped cud I would say because you have mentioned the Office of Economic Opportunity we believe there should he funding of the Office of Eco- nomic Opportunity pro~rams~ too. There. is no reason when you have ~eod schools for the migrants that are operating under the Office of PAGENO="0259" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1081 Economic Opportunity that you should close them down just to trans- fer them over to another agency. Eventually we should get everything in the right organization but let us work for the benefit of the boys and girls. Mr. MEEDS. One other area, Dr. Lumley and then I will stop. I notice in your testimony that von favor the l)~11POseS of subtitle B of title V but stron~lv ur~'e. that. this function be placed iii the. State education agency. Would you care to expand on that, the rea- soning behind that? Unless someone else has covered this in my absence I think the record should show exactly why you feel this way. Mr. LUMLEY. WTe believe there should be planning and evaluation and basically this is sound. It is going to be necessary if we come back to the Congress for the State of Washington to say to you, "Well, here is what has happened in the State of Washington." But we do not. believe it is necessary to create a new agency to do it, to set up a whole new operation. Mr. MEEDS. As a mater of fact, Dr. Luinley. dont von think it would be a little inimical in many situations if tile planning feat.ure, the particular comprehensive planning feature, of education were to be (lone by an agency other than the one that is to execute the plan when it. is made? Mr. LUMLEY. I think I was a little gentle but we feel very seriously about this because there should be the planning done by the educational agency. Mr. MEEDS. We have had testimony before this committee and there is a little problem in this because t.hen in some States, as you can well realize, the. Governors want this as it has been set up under the bill incidentally so that they can have the power to appoint that. agency, and somebody testifie.d here. that. they thought. there would be more continuit.y if the Governor were to do it. Without saying too much about my impressions of this I will just say that I feel it is exactly the opposite. How do you feel? Mr. LUMLEY. I would concur. Mr. MEEDS. You are an excellent witness. Mrs. GEREAU. You are an excellent questioner. Mr. LUMLEY. You are asking t.he right questions. Mr. MEEDS. As I understand, you have no obje.ction that if this were carried through the State education agency and the total planning function were carried out that. that. State agency would then have the right, to contrac.t with private people.. Mr. LUMLEY. That is right. That should be. They should have that right. They have had that right under present law. Our objec- tion, as you have found here on the expansion of this contracting of private industry, was one that we brought to t.he attention of the com- mittee last year because we do not believe that this should be done at the Federal level. Mr. MEEDs. The bills as presently written would allow a State gov- ernment to contract with the Battelle Institution to draw up a compre- hensive plan for education in the State of Washington. Mr. Lu~rj~y. That is right. Mrs. GEREAU. It would do further. It would take 75 percent of the money to give to the Governor and let the Governor do it. and the other PAGENO="0260" 10S2 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 25 percent the Commissioner of Education could contract with that agency to study Washington. That is the probleni. Mr. MEEns. I am sorry that I was not here and I am sure you have been asked about this and I hate to take the committee's time to do this for my own benefit, but your position with regard to Headstart and the Office of Education, I am sure you have been over this but would von mind reiterating your position in regard to this matter for me Mr. LUMLEY. I will be very happy to reiterate. I am smiling only because of the fact that this created a little flak this morning. I said in answer to the question this morning that the NEA I~gislative Corn- flhiSH()fl (ice~ fl~)t recoiuiineiid th' t the l-leadstart pi~Ogiit1ii be tians- feiied inunediatelv to the Office of Education or HEW. Someone reminded me, I think it was Mr. Ford, that Mr. Fuller lla(l l)resente(l a statement from the six national organizations which have. these-this is true, these six organizations got together and debated this but they had no time limit. You see, for a number of reasons, there are certain places right now where Headstart is being operated by the school system and they are doing a tremendously fine job. There are other places where it is being done by private agencies or by private schools. If you traiis- ferred at the present tune with rio change as it is. you would wipe out I think they said 30 percent if you put them under the public school 1~ 1' maui. We don't think this is right. Then on the other hand if you would say, if you put through a law that would provide aid for Headstart. programs for all children you would open up immediately the issue of aid for private sectarian schools. i\[r. MEED~. Without going any further then nlav I compliment. you people and the ~ationii1 Education Association on taking more thaii just a knee-jerk reaction to this question on whether I-Teadstart should be soiriewhere else, and von and I agree it is primarily an education program, and eventually when it ran all be worked out so that we are not cutting out 10 percent of the students and 30 percent of the pro- grams, that this ought to be clone. But in our haste to do this we can't overlook the fact that there are some excellent programs and there. are some students right, now being rearhe(l liv T-Ieadstart in which vast differences are going to be made in their educational potential that would not have this if we were to make this wholesale transfer. As far as I can determine we would not only have problems, certainly we would he barred under ESEA right now unless we changed the law. We might have, trouble passing the law which would allow this, As a matter of fact, people have been fighting this battle with the Congress for about 30 years now. I have asked our committee to write to the attorney general of each State and present to them a situation which exists today in which the contracts are made with private agencies under the Office of Economic Opportunity to determine, whether this should be done by State educa- tional agencies. I submit there are probably a. number of State edu- c:itional agencies that could not do this either. PAGENO="0261" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATJOX AMENDMENTS 1083 ~o we. would find ourselves with sonie States totally and wholly out- ~-tde--~vitliout. I-Teadstart programs at ~ihl. Even if we (lid it by putting it through the hEW cliiectly to the State shool ageluies we still would have a problem. At least that is my present observation. Mr. LFMLEY. I would agree. 1 would say. Comxressman. there is too much of a tendency to generalize that a I Lea(lstart ~ is a kindergarteii program. A lle.adstart ~ in our minds is a pro- gram that is clown in the disadvantaged area. Here it is not. only education, it is health, it. is welfare, it is the involvement of the family. If you put this into school von immediately start talking about cer- tification of teachers and you talk about teacher's salaries. W~heii you are running under OEO you have volunteers. You have good people that are doing good jobs and you are involving the parents. Mr. MEEDS. And von are involving the parem~ts. Mr. LEMLEY That. is right. It has to be (lone. All sihmools are not ready to do t.his. Mr. MEEDS. I heard testimony here this morning, and probably this is not fair because these people are not. here to defend theniselves, but I heard testimony by one of these gentlemen that time schools had al- ways been involved with the parents and students. You were here, you heard this. Mr. LITMLEY. Yes. I heard it. Mr. MEEDS. I am sure this is true. We have PTA's and things like that. But I mean real, rocky ribbed work including ParelltS in these programs. I never have seen it, as I have seen it in time hleadstart program, and I have been interested in education for a number of years. Mr. LIJMLEY. I would agree with you. Mr. MEEDS. I think that is all. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much, Mr. Meeds, for bringing out. some good points. And I thank you Dr. Lumley, and Mrs. Gereau, who has done such an excellent job here, who has been one of your representatives for many years. I understand she was a. great school superintendent in the State of Mont ana. Mr. LUMLEY. Before you close may I ask Mr. McFarland to give you briefly a report on the National Teacher Corps, which is attached to our testimony, because we believe that this is another innovation and a very important program even though it only involves 1,200 people now in a very few districts. Chairman PERKINS. Your report will be inserted in the record in full. I will be ha.ppy to have you summarize it briefly if you care to. Mr. LUMLEY. I will call your attention to a couple of points here. Chairman PERKINS. All right. (The document referred to follows:) NEA QUESTIONNAIRE ON TEAcTIEJt Coaps (Questionnaires were mailed to the 111 school districts participating in the ` National Teacher Corps program. We received a response from 79 percent of the superintendents and 50 percent of the principals. A copy of the tabulated results is attached.) PAGENO="0262" 1084 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1. How do you rate the preservice (summer) training program of the Teacher Corpsmen assigned to your school or school system? Check one: Excellent Adequate Inadequate Uncertain 2. How do you rate the inservice (follow-up) training that the Corpsmen are receiving at the cooperating college or university? Superin- Prin- Cheek one: tefldeflt8 cipal8 Excellent ~ Adequate 39 82 Inadequate ~ 15 Uncertain ~ 3. What do you see as the greatest benefit from the Teacher Corps program? Superin- Prin- Check one: tendents cipaiR A source of personnel available now for work in school serving the poverty areas 42 A future source of qualified teachers for work in schools serving the poverty areas 41 Other (please explain) 5 4. How do you rate the motivation of Teacher Corpsmen compared with beginning teachers in the schools serving the poverty areas? Check one: Corpsmen are more highly motivated No difference is observed between corpsmen and other begin- fling teachers Corpsmen are not as highly motivated Uncertain 5. In general. how would you describe the cooperation of Corpsmen regular school staff? Superin- Check one: tendents Corpsmen are working well with the regular staff 79 Corpsmen are not working well with the regular staff 3 Other (please explain) 6 6. What is your impression of the attitude of your regular staff toward Corpsmen? Superin- Prin- Check one: tendents c~pat8 Very enthusiastic 30 54 Favorable 50 117 Unfavorable ~ Neutral ~ 18 7. Please explain briefly your answer in Question 6 above: (The following statements are indicative of the responses of the superintendents and principals.) (a) "There have been many requests by regular teachers to have NPC members work with them in their classrooms." (h) "Regular teaching staff is grateful for additional assistance, however, some teachers are envious of the fact that corpsmen are released two days a week to attend classes at the university while making the same salary." (c) "The regular staff and the community are very enthusiastic." (d) "Our teachers are pleased with the teacher corps and are real proud of the help the corps has given them. We would like to see the program con- tinued." (e) "At first there was distrust and suspicion. Most of it is gone. Still there is envy and it is based on the payment received to go to school." Superin- Prin- tendents cipais 31 59 44 73 6 12 7 46 Teacher 84 97 19 other Superin- Prin- tendents cipais 60 20 4 4 with 111 56 21 8 your Prin- cipals 176 10 12 the PAGENO="0263" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1085 (f) "At first they did not understand the purpose of teacher corps. This is understandable in view of all the delays involved. Congress could improve this for the future years by passing appropriations sooner." (g) "Our staff is highly pleased with the enthusiasm and progress in two schools now using the NTC program. Both pupils and teachers are happy in the unusual accomplishments of this enriching approach to learning." (h) "The interest of the corpsmen not as great as was anticipated. The cooperating college did not send us the team that we requested; therefore, we had to make numerous changes when they arrived in our system." 8. What are your plans for next year? ~S'uper~n- Prtn- Check one : tendents cipals I plan to ask for additional Corpsmen 49 67 I plan to keep the present Corpsmen for the second year and then to ask for replacements 26 74 I plan to keel) the present Corpsmen for the second year, but I do not think I will ask for replacements 5 14 I plan to dismiss the present Corpsmen at the end of the first year~ 2 3 Other (please explain) 5 33 NOTE: If you are a principal, please answer Questions 9 and 10. skip Questions 11, 12. and 13, and continue with Question 14. If you are a superintendent, please skip Questions 9 and 10 and continue with Question 11. 9. How many Compsmen are now assigned to your school? Number of Corpsmen. 10. Including the Corpsmen now in your school how many Corpsmen could you use efficiently to supplement the services of your regular staff? Minimum number. Maximum number. 11. How many schools in your system now have Corpsmen? Number of schools. 12. How many Corpsmen are now working in your system? Number of Corpsmen. 13. What are your additional needs for Corpsmen? Estimated number of additional schools. Estimated number of additional Corpsmen. 14. Please give your evaluation and any other comments you care to make about the effectivness of the Teacher Corps as a program for training teachers to work in poverty areas. (The following statements are indicative of the responses of the superintendents and principles.) (a) "We believe the NTC can help us to do a better job in preparing children for productive learning. We think the school must do more than offer the students the traditional curriculum during the regular school day. Corpsmen can introduce these pupils to the world outside the routine and provide learning situations during the school day that are appropriate for the individual and small groups." (b) "The National Teacher Corps members are highly motivated, con- cerned with the individual child, demonstrate concern. Good model for traditional teachers. Establish rapport with students." (c) "The Teacher Corps members are much more highly motivated to work in poverty areas than the average teachers." (d) "It Is a very good program for training teachers to work in poverty areas." (e) "Unlike teachers who are hired directly from teacher colleges of other teaeher training institutions, Teacher Corps personnel have been prepared for some difficult situations which they are likely to find in the inner-city schools. Because they treat the children with more understanding, they are more likely to reach the children and to do a more effective job than the teacher trained in a traditional manner." 15. Please give any additional comments about the usefulness of the work the Corpsmen are doing now. Include here your comments about any new services or programs that have been possible this year because of the help of the Corps- PAGENO="0264" 1086 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS men. (The following statements are indicative of the responses of the super- intendents and principals.) (a) `Our Corps members have served our area well in the short time we have had them. The interns have performed invaluable services in remedial programs for individuals and small groups. The contact with the community and its problems have been useful both to the community and to the Corps members themselves." (b) `Such activities as home visits, creative writing, tutorial services, re- medial reading instruction, and 4-H Club work are some of the services being performed by the Corpsmen. We find the members most willing to accept respon- sibiltiy and to have a good attitude toward the children." (c)"The Corpsmen on the whole are doing community work and have been able to greatly enrich and assist in our Title I work." (dl "Use of XTC has enabled us to reduce the pupil-teacher ratio.' (e) "The shortage of teachers has been such that we had five classrooms without teachers froni September to Christmas. We integrated the Corpsmen with a language arts remedial program under Title I. They have introduced new methods into teaching. They work both with the parents and with the children. They are very devoted and conscientious with the children. I only wish we had 25 instead of 5 that I might put them in all our schools. We have not had a single incident or problem with the Corpsmen. Please help to get more adequate funds so we can have more." (f) "Because the interns and the team leader are not required to teach a full load of classes, they can offer individual help to some children. Phey are planning also to offer a new type of seminar in order to help some of our under- achieving students who might benefit from small group work. The preservice and inservice training stresses the use of innovative material and the Teacher Corps team is planning to experiment with the use of some new materials which might be valuable in this school and which might be valuable in similar schools." Mr. MCFARLAND. The questionnaire in the testimony indicates we surveyed the 111 school districts that have Teacher Corps programs. We received a response from T9 percent of the districts and 50 per- cent of the 400 some odd principals who are operating programs in the 111 school districts. I think from the response we received to questions that the over- whelming response was favorable for the total Teacher Corps pro- gram. I would like to point out that one major item, question No. 3: *What do you see as the greatest benefit from the Teacher Corps program? The overwhelming majority talked about its being a service, an available source of personnel in these disadvantaged dis- tricts, and also a future source of personnel. Chairman PERKINS. What did the returns there disclose on the Teacher Corps by numbers? Mr. MCFARLAND. Actually in terms of the superintendents, 42 super- intendents replied that this would be a source of personnel available for work in the district serving the poverty areas at the present time. Forty-one indicated it would be a future source of recruiting teachers that would probably remain in this type of teaching. Five indicated other reasons. And in analyzing the other five, basically wanted to state their feel- ings in a little different way. Chairman PERKINS. Are there any further questions? Mr. MELDS. Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Mr. MEEDS. If I may, is this report in any condition to be put in the record ? PAGENO="0265" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDIJCATION AMENDMENTS 1087 Mr. MCFARLAND. It is attached to the testimony, the. last part. Mr. LUMLEY. I just. wanted him to call attention to the major feature t.here. Mr. MEEDS. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Again I want to thank you, Dr. Lumley. Your testimony has been most beneficial and we appreciate your appearance. The committee will recess until 9 :30 a.m. tomorrow morning. (Whereupon, at 2 :40 p.m., the subcommittee recessed, to reconvene at 9 :30 a.m., Wednesday, March 15, 1967.) PAGENO="0266" PAGENO="0267" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS OF 1967 WEDNESDAY, MARCH 15, 1967 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, C0MMrrrEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR, TVa.s/iington, D.C. The committee met at 9 :30 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Carl D. Perkins (chairman of the committee) presiding. Present: Representatives Perkins, Green, Daniels, Brademas, O'Hara, Carey, Mink, Scheuer, Meeds, Ayres, Bell, Erlenborn, Scherle, Dellenback, Gardner, and Steiger. Staff members present: Robert E. McCord, senior specialist; H. D. Reed, Jr., general counsel; William D. Gaul, associate general counsel; Louise M. Dargans, research assistant; and Charles W. Radcliffe, special education counsel for minority. Chairman PERKINS. The committee will come to order. A quorum is present.. Our first witnesses this morning are Dr. Mattheis, commissioner of education, State board of education, St. Paul, Minn. and Dr. J. A. Byrne, director, division of education, College of St. Thomas, St. Paul, Minn. I call on a distinguished member who has perhaps con- tributed as much in this field as anyone on this committee to in- troduce Dr. Mattheis and Dr. Byrne. my colleague, Congressman Al Quie. Mr. QU-IE. Thank you, Congressman Perkins. It is really a pleasure to introduce to the committee Dr. Duane Mat- theis t.he commissioner of education for Minnesota. I look to Duane Mattheis as one of the great men in education. He is doing an out- standing job in Minneapolis as the commissioner of education a.nd I am extremely proud of him. He was t.he superintendent of schools when I first met him. Some of my colleagues remember my reaction generally to the elementary and secondary schools in previous years. It was not exactly the most favorable. I also remember Duane Mattheis kind of chiding me in my opposi- tion, so he comes to you as a person who has long supported the Federal Government's involvement in elementary and secondary schools. I was extremely impressed with his testimony to Mrs. Green's sub- committee that traveled across the country when we studied the Office of Education and were in Minnesota. I felt, Mr. Chairman, his testimony would be extremely worthwhile to us now that we are con- sidering H.R~. 6230 and also looking at the total of ESEA. 1089 PAGENO="0268" 1090 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTJCATION AMENDMENTS Perhaps the way we ought to proceed is to have Dr. Mattheis speak fii~t. and then afterwards get to Dr. Byrne because I would like to talk to I )r. Byrne and I inlagine von woUld, too, specifically about the leacher Corps. Chairman PF:iuirx~. You may proceed Dr. Mattheis. STATEMENT OF DR. DUANE MATTREIS, COMMISSIONER OP EDUCA- TION, STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION, ST. PAUL, MINN. Mr. MATTHEIS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. and Congressman Quie, in particular. I appreciate very much the kind introduction from the gentleman from Minnesota. I did have the opportunity as superintendent of schools of Minnesot a of voting for the Congressman. I am not in his District anymore so I appreciate the kind comments you have put my way. I am Duane Mattheis, commissioner of education for the State of Minnesota. I am very pleased to have this opportunity to present testimony to you today regarding the Elementary and Secondary Education Act Amendments for 1967. Although the testimony will relate primarily to the amendments, I will also be commenting on those portions of the act not. involved with amendments. At. the outset, lest my criticism and suggestion convey something to the contrary, let me say that. I have long been a strong advocate of Federal aid to public elementary and secondary education. I would also have to say that. I have been, and am becoming increas- ingly so. a strong advocate of general Federal aid for public ele- inent.ary and secondary education rather than categorical aid. Categorical aids tend t.o treat all districts and States the same, distort balanced educational programs, develop unnecessary and un- desirable administrative bureaucracies and generally-especially wit.h l)ortions of ESEA 1965 and some of the 1967 amendments-retain too much control and direction for local school district and State educational agency decisions in the F.S. Office of Education. Another general comment might even be appropriate at. this time. It deals with the matter of amendments as well as the President's message on education and health and the concern of most of us in education at a time when Federal financial participation in public elementary and secondary education is increasing rapidly. That. matter is the timing of renewal of acts along with authoriza- tion and appropriation of funds. Much has been said about the schedule of funding and appropriations by the Congress. I only wish to add my request to the many I am sure you have received in recent months that this matter receive your most careful attention and consideration. It. is impossible for the school districts of our State to effectively and efficiently expend available Federal educational dollars if they continue t.o he appropriated just prior to or, as has been the case in the last. 2 years, after the opening of a school year. I realize there are some problems regardrng the possibility of the Congress making any kind of a funding decision in the sprmg of the year, which would be the most desirable and effective situation as far as the school districts and State departments of education are con- PAGENO="0269" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1091 cerned, but all I am saying is that I hope it can receive the congres- sional, executive, and educational consideration that it deserves. There are amendments dealing with evaluation and long range plan- fling for education; the timing of Federal funding would be an ex- cellent place to start both of these studies. Now I would like to direct my comments to each of the specific t~tles of the act.. Title I-Education of Children of Low-Income Families, has worked out relatively well. I can support the amend- ments being recommended for this title, including the change in amount of funds available for State agency administration and in- clusion of the teacher corps as a new section. I am pleased t.o see the amendment to the Teacher Corps section providing for authority of State departments of education but can- not support the retention by the U.S. Commissioner of Education of authority "to provide members of the Teacher Corps with such train- ing as the Commissioner may deem appropriate." It seems to me this is a serious breach of relationships regarding teacher preparat.ion programs and ought to be corrected immediately. "Appropriate training" for teachers is a State function and responsi- bility and should remain so. My support of the amendments regarding the Teacher Corps should be qualified by a. statement that. I am opposed to the way the entire proposal has been developed out of the U.S. Office of Education. Such a program could be implemented by appropriation to the State edu- cational agency under a State plan arrangement. with considerably greater authority and flexibility vested in the State. I am disappointed to note that the executive branch of the Federal Government. has not recommended the. development of a "State plan" philosophy for title I of ESEA. This procedure has been used with much success in ot.her Federal educational aid programs, notably voca- tional education and N~DEX and could in my opinion do a great cleaT to help each State meet specific and unique needs of the respective State under the broad quidelines of the law. It would also provide the opportunity to eliminate considerable red tape for school districts, State education departments and the U.S. Office of Education. State departments now have authority for ap- proval of title I project. application by local school districts: it would only he a short, but important step to provide for a State plan method of operation for the title. The most disturl)ing matter relating to the title I, I have saved for the last. It relates to the method of funding used for this fiscal year. At. the outset I might say flint I am well aware of the fact that the inclusion of more eligible children without the corresponding increase in appropriation added to the distribution problem for this title. However, the fundamental situation is still there with all of its result- ant problems and issues. For fiscal year 19(~G, Minnesota was allocated approximately ~?4.S million for title T. Late funding. hit c receipt of Federal guideli les and a. large number of school districts in our State con! rilnited to our inability to develop sound programs to expend all of the funds allocated. More important than these reasons, however, was the fact that our State department of education in particular. and the school districts PAGENO="0270" 1092 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS in general, accepted the philosophy that considerable good judgment and discretion should be used in developing the best possible programs under this title; rather than simply spending the money because it was availal)le. As a result of our exercise of educational judgment and restraint, Minnesota school distric.ts ended up spending about $18.2 million of the S24.5 million available under this title. In my judgment the funds were well spent on worthy educational projects and I am not overly concerned about the fact t.hat we were not able to spend all of the allocated amount. I am concerned, however, about. the fact that Minnesota is being penalized in allocation for 196T because of the fact that we did not spend all that was allocated in 1966. I think this procedure is both unwi~e and dangerous. On any future program it is going to be difficult indeed t.o prevent spe.nding for the sake of spending in order to keep from being penalized in a subsequent year. Title TI-School Library Resources, rfextbooks and Other Resource Material, does not come in for much discussion and/or change. I think there are two reasons for this. First, title IT provides for a State plan which makes it easily ad- ministered by the State, and school districts and therefore not much comment or d iffi~ultv. Second, title II is unquestionably the title of this act which most spec.iiically ~tets. entangled in the church-state issue. In my judg- ment, its acimini~trat.ion within the many school dist.ricts across my State and the Nation will have many instances of clear cut, legal violation of the separation of church and state.. It is also my opinion that., within reason, it is impossible t.o administer this particular title in many of the St.ate.s without a breach of the church-state separation. In this regard, as well as with all Federal education legislation, I would strongly support the establishment of a. workal)1 e u(lic i a.l review procedure.. Title ITT-Supplementary Educational Centers and Services has been the focal point, of my concern about ESEA 1965 from the day it was mt.ro(luced in Congress 2 years ago. I am extremely disappointed about. the fa.ct. that the executive branch of Government has not deemed it wise or necessary to introduce amendments regarding this title. I strongly oppose the present from of this title, and the new amend- ment for the Vocational Education Act of 1963 resembles this one to a shocking de.gree, whereby the U.S. Office of Education, for all in- tents and purposes, completely bypasses the legally constituted State agency in dealing directly with local school districts within each State. When I make such a. statement I am well aware of the "review and recommendation" provision for State departments and the fact that in the President's message he indicated that "the recommendations of the State have been sought a.nd followed in more tha.n 95 percent of the projects" under t.his title. It does not take an unusual amount of insight or intelligence to see how the perc.ent age can get that high so easily when one realizes tha.t the U.S. Office of Education has the sole decision making authority and the States can't possibly do anything about the situation no matter how strongly they might differ with the judgment of those in USOE. PAGENO="0271" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1093 I would be the first to admit and indicate that all State depart- ments of education are not staffed to do as good a job in educational leadership ~s they desire. They are all working diligently, within the environment of problems associated with State government and local school districts on one hand and rapidly expanding Federal educa- tion legislation on the other. A significant amount of assistance is being provided by the best and most easily implemented title of ESEA 1965, title V, and I will address myself to it in more detail la.ter. It has been said that State departments do not have the quality of staff to make proper judgment where new ideas and educational inno- vat.ions are concerned. From what I have experienced, all ideas and innovations relating to education-good ones, that is, don~t originate in the U.S. Office of education and they never will. State departments of education need a chance to exert. educational leadership. Title III, under the responsibility of the State. would be a. wonder- ful and unique opportunity for the State department. of education to flex its muscle a.nd exert initiative in meeting the exciting possibilities of the title. On the othe.r hand, the present administrative arrange- ment, could thwart and curtail actually much leadership development opportunity. It. is not. difficult, for me to envision, in view of the present freedom and flexibility of the title a.nd the rapid increase of funds now in the title for, over a short period of years, a federally operated system of educational institutions to be. ope.rntin~ in eech State with little, if any, control or direction of it from the State department of education or any other State agency. Some have said that inasmuch as State departments are not of the desired stature., whatever that. is, to handle. the responsibilities of this exciting title, that the U.S. Office of Education could best operate it as is for a few yea.rs and then consider turning over part or all of the responsibility to the. State departments of education. It is inconceivable that on the. one. hand our department. of educa- tion is sufficiently wise to make decisions for the expenditure of $20 million for exciting and innovative educational programs for the edu- cationally disadvantaged under title I and then not. l)e of the quality and sta.ture to make de.cisions regarding $1.6 million under title III. I cannot envision any bet.ter way to encourage educational chaos in t.he Stat.e.s than to postpone action on this matter beyond the first session of the 90t.h Congress. The States are ready and sufficiently able to administer this title now. A State plan arrangement would provide for sufficient cont.rol and direction by the U.S. Office of Education. No one is saving that. State departments will implement this title to perfection. I don't believe the U.S. Office of Education has or will eiher. By having t.he opportunity to exercise authorit.y State de- partments could grow and improve. Two of the finest. methods of learning are by trial and error and to be given responsibility. Departments of education can grow to become more responsible State agencies by being assigned more responsible tasks. It would be far better for 50 State departments of education to in various ways and degrees work through trial and error of title PAGENO="0272" 1094 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS III than for the U.S. Office of Education to force the same trial and error on all of the sta.tes each time direction is changed. I am not overly concerned about individual States making errors- t.o guarantee against, making errors is the. easiest way to stifle progress that I know. I simply ask that you give us a chance, under a state plan, to administer title III. Title IV with its regional educational laboratories is relatively well organized in implementation at this point and fundamentally the only need here is for a. clear indication, by appropriation, as to their future, and I don't know that I can react with sufficient knowledge about the proposed amendment to title VI at this time or not but it is at least conceivable to me that the functions of these new regional centers to appraise the sPecial education needs of referred handicapped children and to provide services to assist in meeting such needs in so far as they pertain to any multistate responsibility might. be carried out by the preseiit1y organized regional laboratories of title IV. I would hope that we might be able to eliminate the possibility of another organiza.- tional unit. Title V-Strengthening State Departments of Education, has b~n by far the most acceptable, as you can readily imagine, and easily ad- ministered titles of ESEA 1965. The past has been excellent. Min- nesota has use(l some. of its funds to employ staff but the prime use of money has been for a long range statewide educational planning. The proposed amendment of V-B looks like it came out of our pro- grain of the past. ~ years. \Vhich in and of itself causes inc to wonder about the necessity of V-B when this is already a possibility under the pi~ese.nt title. It is true that. there are a few things-a few new t.hings in the amend- ment. and they give rise to some serious concerns on my part. First. and foremost might. he. the question of, "If title V is to strengthen State departments of education, why can't funds under the new amendment be allocated directly to State departments of education similar to the original Title?" Is it because of the inclusion of provision for the higher education option? Why not. assign any funds for such study automatically to that State agency that is now required to administer the Higher Education Fac.ilities Act and the Higher Education Act of 1965? Why the designation by the Governor, when, quite clearly, in each State there is a specific., established state agency responsible for public. elementary and secondary education? I (To not. question the necessity of planning. I have indicated the importance that we gave to this area in the first and second years of the preseiit. act. Nationwide attention to st atewicle planning under title V can easily 1.e implemented by encouragement of U.S. Office of Edu- cation persoiinel under the preseiit act. I am (oncerned ibout the ~ pei~ce~t of title V-B which would be at the discretion of the U.S. Commissioner for project or contract to anyone 111(1 (~VervOiIe. ~s the (.`omniissioner has stated, a number of excellent projects have, been initiated by State departments of eclu_ CitioI~, working cooperatively and jointly, with funds under the 15- 1~.'i~eiit provision of the pi~esent title. I would strongly recommend that if statewide planning is to be emphasized, and I think this would be excellent, that it be done within PAGENO="0273" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDITCATTON AMENDMENTS 1095 the present title with the simple addition of more. funds and that. spe- cial planning project.s in t.his area continue to even be arranged for in the same manner as is presently used in title V. There is also the possibility that any funds and/or regional plan- ning contemplated under the Commissione.rs ~5 percent of V-B could go directly and more properly, in my judgment., to the established Regional Educational Laboratories unde.r title IV of this act. Title V is the best title. I am disappointed that. someone has seen fit to meddle it up with what looks like a mixture of politics, bureau- cracy and increased control and direction from the US. Office of Edu- cation. It is a good title now: necessary changes and expansion could best. be taken care of by making additional funds available. The IT.S. Office of Educ.ation staff working in this area are the most experienced and understanding. They are the. first. to agree that the problems and needs of the various state.s are different and should be recognized. Many of them have had experience in State departments of education. They know the situation first hand. I am disappointed with the fact that the one title of ESEA 1965 that has received almost. complete and TlflaniiflollS Silj)port from every segment. did not. warrant. a recommendation for an increase, in its basic appropriation. I will only make a brief comment or two regarding the proposed amendment to the Vocational Education Act,. of 19G3. This sounds like title III of ESEA 1965 all over again, and 1 won't. repeat my feel- ings about. the title. but. suffice it to say that I strongly O~~OS~ this amendment. The stated objective of the amendment can be accom- pushed within the piese.iit act very simply by the U.S. Office of Ecluca- t.ion requiring that each state Plan provide for the development of "exemplary and innovative programs or projects in vocational education." And if the answer is that it c.an awl should have been taken care of under the present. ac.t. then I would say peol)le at the State and Federal level have not been doing their job. But just as one cylinder of an engine not, functioning properly ia. no reason to throw out the engine so a minor problem with an ex- cellent piece of legislation is no reason to alter it so severely as this amendment would cause to happen. The engine like the act might just. need a little tuning, not. a complete overhaul or discard. Minnesota has a State board for vocational education that is re- sponsible for Federal vocational program a dminist rat ion at. a] I levels. I am proud to say that I think we. have one of the finest vocational education programs in the Nation-and we are constantly seeking ways to improve it. In my judgment the amendment. to the Vocational Education Act of 1963 could have a negative, if not ruinous effect on our State pi~o- gram. I would strongly encourage the philosophy of the amendment. to be provided for in the State l)lafl 1)rovisiOn of the act in its present form. I would also like to comment. on something noticeably absent from the list of amendments pi'oposedl for ESEA 19(~T~. I woul(l like to add my st.rong recommendation to the many on have undoubtedly heard for the. transfer of the T'Iead-ztart ])rograln md tIme Trea(lstarr fohlowthrough to the IT.S. Office of Education aiicl tlieii inclusion as an integi.a1 part. of title I, ESEA. 7~-4~2----~----1t. 2 ----1.~ PAGENO="0274" 1096 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDIJCATION AMENDMENTS The worth of the programs is unquestioned. The procedures for implementation could eit her strengthen the finest educational system in the world or take the chance of seriously weakening it with the establishment of a quasi-Federal system of education for this par- ticular group of children. Many new ~rojccts and ideas can very easily, and in most cases much better. be implemented through existing agencies with only the addi- tion of funds. Too many times it is thought to be necessary to establish a new agency for each new program or idea. And then the next thing of course is to create a third agency to coordinate the old and t.he new. In conclusion and summary I would like to make the following points: I strongly support Federal aid to public elementary and sec- ondary education. I long for the day when we will have general rather than categorical educational aids. There is a need for significant additional State responsibility and au- thority with regard to the administration of Federal education legis- lation. I have a general concern about new Federal education legisla- tion providing too much discretion for the U.S. Commissioner of Edu- cation in using agencies other than the legally constituted State and local governmental units to carry out the intent of the acts. Of paramount importance is the necessity to take action relating to a fundin~ schedule that will give the States and school districts a c.lian'e. to carry out the intent of the legislation. Title. I needs provision for a. State plan and the inclusion of Head- start, and Headstart followt.hrough. The inclusion of the Te.acher Corps and the amendments relating to it are improvements but are far from the desired position of St.ate involvement and direction of this pro.~rram. - Concern for title TI is church-state related. Tit.le III is most in ii~ed of change.. A State plan with resulting State responsibility and authority is a must.. Title. IV needs an indication of continued fund- ing. Title V should be left. as is and expanded to meet desire of amendment. by simple. change in title name and increase of funds. Title VT-Regional Resource Centers for Improvement of Educa- tion of 1-Tandic.apped Children needs to be studied in greater detail before. a judgment can he. made. There is a. possibility for such a service. It could best he se.rved by an allocation to the State agency having responsibility for t.his area of education. The. amendment to the Vocational Education Act should be changed drastically to provide for the. intent of the amendment within the present State plan arrangement.. Thank von very much, Mr. Chairman and members of t.he com- mittee, for the. opportunity to present this testimony to you today. I would be most happy t.o attempt t.o answer any questions relating to my statement or other area.s that might have been inadvertently omitted. (Dr. Matt.he.is present.ed the following newspaper article:) [From the Minneapolis Star, Mar. 3, 19671 TEACHER Loss FP IN CITY SCHOOLS (By Deborah Howell) More teachers are resigning this year and fewer teachers are applying for posi- tions next year in the Minneapolis School District, Loren Cahiander, school personnel director, said today. PAGENO="0275" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1097 Cahiander said "It looks worse than last year" when the district began school in September with more than 150 vacancies, the highest in the Twin Cities area. Leaders in two major teachers' organizations back up Cahiander and say more teachers are trying to leave Minneapolis than ever before. The main reasons appear to be money and morale. Higher take-home salaries are paid in most suburban districts and morale is low since the defeat of the 16-mill tax increase in November which forced budget cutbacks felt in the class- rooms, teacher representatives say. Statistics from the past 10 years show that more teachers have left the system in the past two years than ever before. The highest numbers have left to accept other jobs or teaching positions in or out of the state. statistics show. Other reasons given for the exodus are wives leaving the city to be with their husbands, retirement, marriage and maternity. Applications are running about 20 per cent lighter than last year at this time, Cahlander said. One hundred and one teachers have resigned as of June 1 this year, compared to 87 last year. Most resignations come later in the year, however. The largest jump In resignations comes from elementary teachers. Sixty have resigned this year as compared to 35 at this time last year. And one of the district's main problems comes In hiring elementary teachers. School started this year with 112 teacher vacancies in elementary schools which were filled by substitute teachers. About 50 of the substitutes are still on the job. The Minneapolis turnover rate is about 11 per cent a year. Out of about 3,400 professional personnel-3,000 of them classroom teachers-43.5 left the system last year and 382 the year before. The highest number previously to have resigned was 370 in 1962-63. Turn- over figures remained fairly stable, otherwise, until the past two years. The Minneapolis turnover figure compares favorably with the state turnover figure of 10 to 12 per cent, however the drop in applications figures more Promi- nently in Minneapolis than in suburban areas. Cahlander said. The big fear is that Minneapolis will not have enough applications from com- petent teachers to replace the ones who leave, Cahlander said. He said that suburban districts have a higher ratio of applications to vacan- cies than does Minneapolis. The main reasons are higher salaries in the suburbs and the fact that teachers usually know In what school and what kind of children they will be teaching in the suburbs. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you. Mr. Quie will introduce the other gentleman from his State. Mr. Qu~. I would like to introduce Dr. Byrne. division of educa- tion of the College of St. Thomas of St.. Paul, Minn. I had a con- versation with Dr. Byrne last year sometime after the Teacher Corps had just begun t.o be implemented. I was ~mpressed by the knowl- edge he had of the same type of training-bringing people under the teaching profession who did not have an interest in it. when they w-erc getting their baccalaureate degree. They have, been engaged in St. Thomas with this type of training. The people on this committee know my attitude toward the Teaehe,r Corps when it was implemented at that. time.. While. Dr. Byrne. had reservations about it he did not have the same objections that I (lid. So again we have a person who is not completely in agreement. n-ith me. who is here to testify this morning but I was impressed with his knowledge of the Teacher Corps and the w-ay in w-hic.li it. has operated in the past. year and with his knowledge of the internship program. Dr. Byrne does not have prepared testimony but. I think the test i- mony t.hat he will give us will be extremely worthwhile for this committee. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead, Dr. Byrne. PAGENO="0276" 1098 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION A~NDMENTS STATEMENT OF DR. J. A. BYRNE, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF EDUCATION, COLLEGE OF ST. THOMAS, ST. PAUL, MINN. Dr. B~iixr. Thank you. Mr. Chairnian. and thank you, Mr. Quie. I would like to say first. of all I do support the idea of including the Teacher Corps materials now imder title I. I think they are probably quite appropriate to that point. General- ly speaking I am sympathetic to the amendments as they pertain to the Teacher Corps. What I did feel. Mr. Quie, last summer, I think refers to the ex- perience as we had initially with the Corps. St. Thomas has never op- erated a Teacher Corps program but we were asked as one of the first institutions to take a. look at. it. I might. point out. on a Friday after- noon we were told a team from HEWT would visit us on Monday morn- ing and we were asked to make a dec.ision with regard to our accept- ing the Corps by that afternoon. It developed that. when the representatives came from the HEW office that they were not. prepared to discuss the program with us. They pointed out that. they had l)een briefed for about one-half hour before the. arrived on our campus. WTe had to sit. down together with Mr. Heineman who is the director of t.he teacher certification in the state of Minnesota. \Ve also sat down with the local superintendents of schools and I think in a period of about half a day we had pretty much described what. the Corps might. be like to the people who had come to explain it to u~. After we had made a careful investigation of the. advantages and disadvantages we chose not. to involve ourselves with the Corps at that time not because of any strong feeling about it but simply be- cause we did not. fee.l we had the adequate personnel at that particular moment to take on the Corps responsibility. I would like to point out, too, that. I am not inclined to follow the arguments which suggest that the Corps is an incursion on the part of the Federal Government into local school systems. The people with whom I have spoken. administrators for example., in Philadel- phia. in Detroit. in Chicago. in Pittsburgh have indicated that they can see some real good coining. They don't. worry about. this particular point particularly. What has disturbed them and I think has disturbed all of us once. annoimeeci the. Corps got. off to a. very slow start. and we are told, for example, that the funds were reduced, that. appropria.tions were late particularly because a. Senator was ill and was not. able t.o be. present. for these ap- propriations and the like. At. any rate. a.s of the end of the summer, the first working period of the Corps. there had been no Federal funding. As a. result. of this, l~ percent of those. who were involved in the Corps in the initial sum- mer experience, were lost to the Corps. As of October there. wa.s still no funding. I think there has been some discouragement as a result.. I would like t.o point out. that dis- eouiagement comes not. only to t.hose interested in the Corps hi view of the experience they might have, in participating. I think part of the ill feeling that. one might have toward some of these programs on t.he part of the collegiate institution that. trains PAGENO="0277" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1099 these people is that one goes through a good deal of work to prepare a program, to prepare a proposal, for example, such as the Teacher (torps proposal would be oniy to find that either it. is not going to be financed or as I said before the people. who come from Washington are not as informed as we are in the district. So these have been some of our concerns particularly. Mr. Quie has also mentioned the fact that we operate an internship program now in teacher education. The only point I would like, to make here is the fact. that we do accomplish pretty much of what is accomplished in the Corps. We do this without any Federal funding of any kind. There is no inference t.o be taken from this. It is certainly not intended. But we do provide our people with the basic t.ra.ining for teacher educa- tion. We do insist that our people, for example. have a good back- ground in the field of sociology; for example, let me say our courses in sociology of the community, courses in juvenile delinquency, courses in race and minority problems, and the like. Our people do go out very well prepared for this and we tried to provide as much experience as we can to give the people some notion of the climate or the clientele with which they are going to work. In the Sta.te of Minnesota, a.nd I think Mr. Mat.theis will probably agree with me, we don't have the same degree of disadvantage that we know of in other States, but nevertheless we feel our people are going t.o many States to teach and they should be prepared to teach in this fashion. This raises one question I do have about the amendment pertaining to the Corps and that is section l~6 which deals wit.h local control. It specifies that t.here shall be local control t.o retain authority to first assign such members within their systems, secondly make transfers within their systems and third determine the subject. matter to be taught.; fourth, determine the terms and continuance of t.he assignment of such members within their system. The only thing that I should like to ask those concerned with this bill to keep in mind is that there is a possibility that. in an interest in trying t.o give local autonomy as fa.r as possible to t.his program, we ma.y let ourselves open t.o some possible discrimination. I think tha.t this is a matter of some concern, because if the local agency has a.s much right in this respect, I think the local agency could he motivated by motives t.hat might be quite crass, motives which might. he illogical. Chairman PERKINS. Are you saying there is too much local auton- `omv? Dr. BYRNE. I would sa.y on]v in this respect. If the local authority or agency can say yes or no wit.h regard to the assignment. of Corps members there is a possibility that they could certainly inject a notion of discrimination. Chairman PERKINS. You are suggesting a Federal guideline of some kind to prevent anything of that nature happening? Dr. BYRNE. That is right. Mr. Perkins. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Dr. BYRNE. This would probably be my only point, of criticism. Generally speaking I feel t.he program is good. PAGENO="0278" 1100 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS We have to be concerned with the disadvantaged or otherwise we shall all be disadvantaged. I do feel that this is a form of an attack on po~~erty. I am somewhat concerned as Congressman Green indi- cated along the line in her remarks that there is a possibility that we are moving into a local salary schedule. We are moving into a question of teacher morale. But there is not enough support, I don't think, from t.he people with whom I talked, to actually consider this serious. There is a feeling there is so much good to be gained in this program that it should be encouraged as far as possible. This would be the last point I would like to make on this. Chairman PERKINS. Let me say Dr. Byrne, and also Dr. Mattheis, I think you have brought to the committee some most outstanding testimony and outstanding suggestions for the committee to consider. I am deeply impressed with your statement, Dr. Byrne, that you are sympathetic with the Teacher Corps and from your conversations with the people in the greater cities that there seems t.o be a feeling that it. got off to a slow start and that. the chief handicap has been from the lack of funding which has brought about much discouragement in the areas where the Corps is now operating. Is that your view-your true feeling about the analysis of the sit- uation ? Dr. BYRNE. I think it does worry t.he collegiate institutions which have been invited to participate in programs of this type because there is a feeling that things may not have been thought out well enough. I think t.here is a problem of communication. This would be a bet- ter way of describing it. From the time an amendment is prepared and leaves Congress. I think it. takes a long time for the proper line of communications to reach us. Chairman PERKINS. Perhaps I should have asked Dr. Matt.heis, Has the city of St.. Paul taken advantage of the Teacher Corps? Mr. MATTHEIS. Not the Teacher Corps. Minneapolis has had a part icipat.ing program. Chairman PERKINS. But. you do not. have in St.. Paul? Mr. MATrHEIS. We have one in t.he State but it is in Minneapolis. Chairman PERKINS. How is it working there? Mr. MA'rruEIS. I would say they would say it has worked out rela- tively satisfactorily, with the same concerns that Dr. Byrne has related to the timing of it and the difficulties of getting it underway; I think these are the prime problems that. they have identified. Chairman PERKINS. From your personal knowledge are the local boards of educ.ation there anxious to see the Te.acher Corps continue and prosper? Mr. MArFHEIS. It would be my judgment., Mr. Chairman, that they do have this feeling. Some of it might be motivated and I see this at, the State level. The problems of t.he great cities are enormous and I think that they see an opportunity to grasp at anything almost that would help the.m get out of some of the problems that they have with perhaps some compromises and some of the problems associated with them. If I may, Mr. Chairman, I would interject at this point that I would take strong difference with the opinion of my colleague over here from PAGENO="0279" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1101 Minnesota with regard to the local authority of the designation of who shall be employed. I think this would have disastrous and ruinous effects if the Federal Government and any of its agencies could in fact place them, place people in local school districts without their approval. Chairman PERKINS. I am in accord with your remarks on that point. I noticed the approach of the other great educator on that point but we never could have enacted the legislation originally and we have broadened it more so now, if we undertook to strip the local boards of education of authority. I think there then would have been some grounds for Federal inter- ference. I think you have gotten over that bridge so that there is not any Federal interference. Since you gentlemen come from the great. State of Minnesota, I am going to ask Dr. Byrne, since you did not agree with one of his statements t.hat he agrees wit.h one of your statements. All of us in this great democracy have a right to agree and disagree and that is what a committee is for to resolve some of those differences. On page 2 nea.r the bottom of the page, Dr. Ma.ttheis states that he cannot support the retention by the U.S. Commissioner of Educa- tion of authority to provide members of the Teacher Corps with such training as the Commissioner may deem appropriate. Do you feel t.hat. we infringe upon the rights of the State by letting or permitting the Commissione.r of Education to contract for training, Doctor? Dr. BYRNE. No; I do not see this point hut I do see t.he point that Mr. Matt.heis makes and that is the formula for teacher education I think is the basic right of the State. I think that. a Corps member must be prepared to respect this and he must follow whatever the pro- cedure is coursewise, experiencewise for education within a given State. Chairman PERKINS. Do you feel we have now infringed upon that, right anywhere here because a teacher cannot go into a. local school district unless the local education board under the State department employs that teacher and give.s that. teacher a. contract. and t.he.y would have to abide by the State laws? Do von see any infringement there ~ Dr. BYRNE. No; I don't. see the. infringement there. As you say they must. abide by State law and State regulations. I would add a point, at this time if I might, Mr. Perkins. and tha.t. is one other prob- lem that. arose with the Corps and it is a problem that. I do not. think has been straightened out yet is a fact that. a person may receive his summer experience in one community and t.hen be assi ned to another community totally different for his year or 2 years of experience.. This is what bothers me, I think, in part. that a pe.rson for example might, he trained let us say in Minnesota at one of our institutions where he ha.s perhaps ce~rt.ain advantage.s but certain disadvantages in terms of the clients that he might get. to know, the experience, he might have, and then at any rate he has prepared himself for, say, our Min- neapolis schools and then at. the end of the summer he is assigned to an- othe.r district, foreign t.o his experience and t.he like. It seems t.o me the program would be strengthened if t.he loca.l communities certainly within the Sta.t~ would take people who had been trained within the State. PAGENO="0280" 1102 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Chairman PERKINS. Mrs. Green. Mrs. GREEN. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am well aware of the tremendous shortage of teachers and the urgent. need to attract more teachers to the profession and also, that something must be done to see that they are retained in the profession, to make it attractive enough so that they will want to stay. My question would be on alternatives to a National Teachers Corps. What if von were given the choice of having the same amount of money given to the universities to expand their teacher training pro- grams which they are already engaged in and which involves the placement of teachers in schools or if we could give the same amount of money to a. city school system and the State department of educa- tion to do the same job either in special institutes or inservice trainmg progra.ms~ would your 1)refe1~ence then be for a National Teacher Corps and, if so. why? WThat. is it that the Commissioner of Educa- tion can do in the recruitment, and training, and placement of teach- ers that cannot be done by a State department or a university if they have the same amount of money? I would make one footnote if I may. I think the one thing we must do in the Teachers Corps is to concentrate or focus attention on the critical shortage of teachers and we had better get to the job. Dr. BYRNE. I would second your late note but I would see the same advantages with perhaps a greater degree of support if one were able to channel the. same money to the central state agency which would be your department of education within the State and let that agency work out the arrangements with the local colleges, universities, and with the local agencies and the schools themselves. I feel one could accomplish as much good. I do feel that the foot- note that you have mentioned has been most helpful in that this has called attention to the crisis in education and particularly not just to the shortage of teachers but the shortage of teachers who are willing to work with the disadvantaged because there are not really that many people who are interested in these people. Mrs. GREEN. Would you care to comment, Dr. Mattheis? Dr. MATTHEIS. I think the doctor from St. Thomas has stated my position quite well. An outright grant. to either of these institutions or a State plan arrangement for this particular area of teacher prepara- tion I would concur that the attention given to teachers for these par- ticular children is long overdue and we could properly place emphasis there and at the same time serve to meet some of the needs of the shortage of teachers generally. I would feel it could be implemented at the State and local level very easily if in fact not better. Mrs. GREEN. Which would you prefer if you had the choice? Dr. MATTHEIS. I would prefer the latter, the State or college level. We have had many programs of training teachers who have been handled directly by the colleges and universities. I think they have done exceptional work. Local schools are doing through title I great inservice work. It would be one short step away from additional respoflsil)ilty and preparation of teachers. I would not. really prefer. I guess at this point, I think it could he handled very well by either of these three local agencies. PAGENO="0281" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTJCATIOX AMENDMENTS 1103 Mrs. GREEN. Do either of you gentlemen know or do you feel eclu- cators in the country know why teachers are not staying in the pro- fession? And why they are leaving the schools where there is a high concentration of the clisadvantiureci? Dr. MArrHEIS. I think the headlines greeting us this morning from New York are one reason. The teaching of children has and always will be a very difficult task. I think that teachers need the support of parents and citizens like the never needed it before and where they don't get it many of them see other occasions that they may enter and not have the problems they do in teaching. There is of course the financial aspect that has been dwelled upon at length. I think it is still a problem with us and a very great one. Those two items to me are significant problems that we have to be confronted with in keeping teachers in teaching. There are too many of them who prepare. for teaching who do not go into it or stay in it. I think there are no solutions to that problem. Mrs. GREEN. I have the same clipping you have about teachers quitting because of unruly children. Chairman PERKINS. Without objection it will be inserted in the record. Mrs. GREEN. I think we have created an image that we are doing something about the teacher shortage and yet we are only creating an image, rather than doing something substantive about a very serious problem. If we have 5,000 in the Teacher Corps and many more leave teaching because we have done nothing about the. classroom and the teachers' safety then I think we are pretending that we are reach- ing a solution but we are not doing the real indepth job that we should be doing. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Quie? Mr. QuIE. I would like to ask, Dr. Byrne, the length of time that your students spend in the internship period of their training. Dr. BYRNE. Perhaps I can just briefly tell you something al)out the program which will answer your question. Our students spend a sum- mer with us in which they take courses in educational psychology, courses that are concerned with the skills in teaching. They have an opportunity to observe students in various projects in the summer. As of September they enter a contractual relationship with a local school district in which they teach part of the day at a reduced salary. The balance of the day they return to our campus for additional courses because part of the program is based on the thesis of a work-study approach in the sense that. as you go along your instruction is more meaningful if you have a chance. to experience, some of the points that. you have been talking about. People work in this program for the year. They return to the campus for another full summer so that in the span of two suimners and the fractional school year they earn their master's degree and they have had the experiences that we described as an internship. Mr. QUIE. Do they receive any stipends for the work that they per- form in the public school? Dr. BYRNE. Yes; ordinarily they teach three periods a clay and for each of these periods there is a pro rata compensation. Mr. QUIE. Who pays that? PAGENO="0282" 1104 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Dr. BYRNE. That is paid by the local school district.. Mr. QFIE. Have you any difficulty placing these interns? Dr. BYRNE. This program is just getting off to a point. I really can't answer that. I don't anticipate any difficulty at all. In fact I would look at it the other way around and say there would probably be a considerable clamor for these people. Mr. QUTE. If that is the case, do you think a similar arrangement could be worked out for a federally funded program to train teachers to reach the culturally and socially deprived children and perform internship duties? Dr. BYRNE. Yes; I think this could be worked out in this direction. I think this is something of the approach of the corps where it is a combination of experience in social agencies including the schools and playgrounds and the like together with courses on a campus. I think you could fund either type of program, either directly through your ~.tate to this kind of institution or you could use the present National Teacher Corps approach. Mr. QFIE. Of course, the difference presently in t.he Teacher Corps is the local school does not have to pay 1 cent for these interns and I think this always ca.n be considered as coloring their judgment. I find people are always quite happy about free gifts and don't like to look a gift. horse in the mouth. I am glad that you are running a program whic.h has some similarity to the Teacher Corps so we can judge what a school is willing to do when that would be required to pay a portion of the cost themselves. What do you think of the need of having a national recruitment? Mr. BYRNE. Apparently there is a need for a national recruitment because we. are. not, accomplishing as much as we would like to do. as individuals, as local agencies, as States. We certainly go after teachers. There is a considerable migration of teachers from one State to another. As Mr. Mattheis pointed out this morning, teachers leave the profession very often just at the time that. they are starting it. They leave for reasons that. Mrs. Green asked about, reasons for example pertaining to salary. reasons pertaining to the problems reported. for example, in this morning's paper or they leave also be- cause there. is too much competition from. industry. For instance we lose our best physicists, chemists, and scientists. We find these people are signed on by industry at considerably higher salaries than schools could pay. Mr. QUTE. How would the internship program affect this going out of the teaching field? Mr. BYRNE. I am more concerned about it calling attention in a loud voice for the need. Mr. QtTE. What. would your reaction be, Mr. Mattheis? Mr. MArrrTETs. I think this kind of situation was exemplified by ti'e application of title I in Minneapolis and St. Paul. There was great need for implementation of programs and these cities put out a call for additional people, some professionally prepared and some nonprofessionally prepare.d in the teaching profession and they were overwhelmed with numbers. I think the people are there. This can be taken care of I think in the cities and colleges, the recruiting of and the selection of people. PAGENO="0283" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS 1105 I saw an overwhelming feeling among people to I)a1~t1cip~te in these kinds of programs. I think all it really needs is some of the funding to be made available to implement the program. I think they are there locally and are waiting for the call. I don't think it would take a national recruitment program to even get theni to come out. Mr. QUTE. Dr. Byrne, the students which you will be training will not have a label on them "Teachers Corps." Do you think this is going to hurt their esprit de corps and their willingness to stay in the school and their teaching of the culturally deprived Dr. BYRNE. I don't think it will hurt it. at all. I think perhaps there is a certain veneer, a certain prestige that is associated with any kind of title and some people will say this is big and interesting and I would like to have my name identified with it. In fact many students have approached me with this point., with the feeling this has opened up some vista that they have never dreamed of themselves and I don't think they will profit from either having or not having the title. Mr. QUIE. So you would not. encourage us to expand the idea of corps then to give your student that label, too, so they would not feel inferior? Dr. BYRNE. No; our people don't feel inferior at all. Mr. GARDNER. If the gentleman would yield, I would like to pick up on this subject. We have heard a number of witnesses in the past few weeks who feel this would be carried out better on the St.ate level. Could you be more specific? Why do you think it could be better on the local level than on a Federal scale? Dr. BYRNE. My reasons-my response to that. would he we are seeing it done. We have moved pretty much on our own in this direction and it is working. We feel our cooperation with the State makes this quite possible. I am not certain for example that we would a.ttract any more people if we had the corps than we. now have. I think Mr. Matt.heis has pointed this out. I see the major advan- t.age of the corps as one of calling attention to the need for teachers. I am not certain that the program itself provides better teaching ar- rangements or teaching experiences or arrangements. I just have the feeling that we have been able t.o handle this pretty well on our own. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Daniels. Mr. DANIELS. I have not had the opportunity of listening fully to the gentleman's statement. If the Chairman please, I will yield my time t.o Mr. Brademas. Chairman PERKINS. Is there objection to the gentleman from New Jersey yielding his time to t.1~e gentleman from New York, Mr. Brademas? Mr. BRADEMAS. I thank my colleague and I want to express my appreciation to both of our distinguished witnesses for their very thoughtful observations. I was struc.k particularly by what you said in the light of an article I got hold of this week that. was sent around to us in a roundup of press clippings on education because it. comes from a Minnesota newspaper. I might say although he is on the other side of the aisle and we don't always find ourselves in agreement, that von in Minnesota should be glad you have such an able man as Mr. Quie. for education PAGENO="0284" 1106 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS on our comulittee. The clipping to which I refer is March 3, Mm- neiil)()liS star and it is cafleci "Teachers Loss ITp In City Schools." More teachers are resigning this year arid fewer teachers are applying for positions next year in the Minneapolis School District, Loren Cahiander. school personnel director, said today. Cahlander said. it looks worse than last year when the district began school in September with more than 150 vacancies, the highest in the Twin Cities area. Leaders in the two major teachers organizations back up Cahiander and say more teachers are trying to leave Minneapolis than ever before. The main reasons appear to be money and morale. Higher take home salaries are paid in most suburban districts and morale is low since the defeat of the 16 mill tax increase in November which forced budget cutbacks in the class- rooms. teachers representatives say. I thought. of this article when I heard what you two gentlemen were saving because it. seems to me that although most of us have, assumed that. Minnesota is a great leader in education, as I know it is, and that you have a lot more money for education than the poorer States, even you have trouble, apparently, in keeping teachers in your big city school systems. I was especially struck, Mr. Byrne, by your observation that the Teacher Corps has opened up some vistas to young people that would otherwise not be the case. I want to be sure I understand the atti- tiicles of both of von toward the hiring and firing of Teacher Corps members. Do I understand there is a difference of opinion betw-een you with respect to the autonomy of the local school district, in this respect? Dr. Bvnxr. I rather doubt there is any real difference. I think my major concern is that thei'e l)e no opportunity provided for any dis- crimination in the employment. There is the possibility, I think, throu~h the present. wording for this sort of discrimination. I think that we have to have the proper safeguards. I certainly would favor the autonomy of the local school district in that respect. Dr. MArrnEIs. I feel very strongly about this and I feel there is always the possibility of the infallibility of the implementation of laws, there are adequate law-s now-, State and Federal, to prevent dis- crimination needs. Now, w-hether it is going to be picked up and en- forced I can't say. We were particularly referring to the hiring. On the hiring I can concur also. Mr. BRADEMAS. I noted some of the statements you made, Dr. Byrne. You said, generally speaking, you feel the program is good and it ought to be encouraged as much as possible, and you said the Teac.her Corps has called attention to the education of the disadvantaged be- cause there are not. enough people willing to w-ork with these children. Why do you think that? Dr. BYRNE. I think, first of all, let me say, many of our teachers come from an environment in which they have little contact with the disadvantaged, number one. Second, they are. prepared in institutions which give little attention to the disadvantaged. I know that it is a rather shocking experience for many people who are trained in our colleges and universities when they go out and find they are not. dealing with the people they thought they might have in class which, in effect, would be the sons and daugh- tei's of their neighbors. Mr. BRADEMAS. Dr. Mattheis. I noticed in looking at your testi- rnouv thai it was a very ringing 1)1C'L for more State role in operating PAGENO="0285" ~LEMFXT~RY AND ~LCONDARY EDTCAT1OX AMENDMENTS 1107 all of these programs but I also noted in your statement you said that the attention ~riveii these disadvantaged children, teaching these clis- advantaged children is long overdue. Where have the States been hiding? Dr. MATTIIEIS. I think, Mr. Congressman, they have been hiding behind two cloaks perhaps and I al Iil(led to this before ciso-lack of leadership in many cases, lack of finances in others. At this point, if I might insert, there are some things that are going on ill States and communities and I would point out in partic~1l~ir with the dis- advantaged program in St. Paul, Minn., which was headed by Dr. Forrest Conner, the president of the American Association for School Administrators, long before this program was implemented he and the St. Paul School Board saw fit to work in these areas and did significant things. It took additional staff and additional money. Some of these schools in the very disadvantaged areas are the p1~ile of St. Paul in Minnesota. It can be done and it is being done where. there is the leadership and dedication to do it. It has not been done in enough areas. Mr. BRADEMAS. You realize the thrust of my question; fellows like me are somewhat. skeptical when State leaders in education come along and complain that Uncle Sam is running roughshod over them and they can do it better, and you look around and suddenly you see all those opportunities to exercise State responsibility when the flag of States rights has been raised somehow have, not been exercised, at least to the fullest. I don't think you will disagree with what I just said. Dr. MATPHEIS. I don't, I would say one other thing. There is a very important new additional ingredient-money. Mr. BRADEMAS. Of course, and as long as we authorize and appro- I)rimlte it you want to be sure you control it~ s~)endling. Is that a fair assumption? I )r. MATTHEIS. That is right; and I think we have exhibited we can do a. really relatively good job of it. Mr. BRADEMAS. I don't have any profound object.ion to seeing a far greater State role, indeed, as I have said in here a nnmbe.r of times, I am strongly in favor of greatly strengthened State depart- nie.nts of education but I would be more impressed by your arguments if I had seen the greater evidence of the willingness on the part. of the State government to put up the money and to put up the leadership instead of just putting up conversation and dialogue. I hope that is not an unfair position. I am much more concerned about what people do than what they say in these matters. Do you have a coimstituitional prohibition against a progressive income tax in your State.? l)r. MATTHEW. No, sir; we do have a progressive, income tax in Minnesota as the Congressman from Minnesota can well test.ify. Mr. Qrn~. If the gentleman will yield, it is the highest in the Union as well. Mr. BRADEMAS. That is solid evidence to me that you really want to do something about education and are. doing something about it. Mr. Qi~r. \Ve earmarked the income tax for education and we are now looking at ways for providing more money for education in Mm- PAGENO="0286" 1105 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS nesota because the income tax has not. been able to fulfill all of our needs iii the State. and realizing the property taxes would not do it. Dr. MArrilvIs. Minnesota consistently ranks higher than our others. We do dedicate a considerable amount to education. You can ap- preciate the position of a commissioner of education who on the one hand works with the State legislature that you are referring to here as the State body governing these things day in and day out and pleading the case and working hard to get it. and it is not an easy task. I think improvements are being made and we appreciate the assistance corn- intr froni the Federal level. Mr. BRADEMAS. In title III you call for a far greater role of the States also and it would seem to me tha.t it would be of interest then if you would compare. what. you said with the reports of the survey conducted by Dr. Richard Miller which were given to us the other day because. they are not really on all fours. At least judging from Dr. Millers survey, the only one I know on how the title III program is operating today, there is a. strong case-a strong indication that States have not generally speaking. only a handful have, paid much serious attention to or invested much of t.heir resources and top people rn helping shape. title III programs. Do vim have any comment on that? Dr. ~L~rPTIETS. Yes, sir; I would. This is indicative of the degree of authority that the law in the U.S. Office of Education has given to the States. They have not given us any authority. Mr. BRADEM~\S. That is not accurate. Dr. MATrIIEIs. I think the record would speak to the contrary. Mr. BiL\DE~L\S. You (10 not have a statutory veto power but, as I recall Dr. Miller's statement, a number of States-California and New York among others-there has been an effort to give real leadership whic1~ has had a very constructive impact on the shaping and opera.- tion of title III programs under the authority given to the Stat.e de- I)aItmllellts of education to revie.w and make recommendations. I am not yet impressed that the State departments have made cnuu~h of an effart to give, the leadership t.hat they could give if t.hey were really serious about these. programs. Dr. MATTHEIS. I would only respond by saying I speak from the personal experience of one State., Minnesota, and I would say from the first. proposal that we submitted, and I think we saw a clear indication that we were not. going to have this kind of authority and judgment be.ing accepted by the U.S. Office of Education. Mr. BRADEMAS. In my last second I would be glad, too, if you would give us maybe not. now but maybe some time when there is more time some evidence for your observations. Dr. ~LVFrHETs. I would be happy to. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Erlenborn. Mr. ERLENBORN. Dr. Mattheis, as I note you are strongly in favor of title V. to strengthen State departments of education, but in your prepared statement which I have had a chance to read-I was not here when you delivered it-I notice that you are not in favor of the amendments to title V; is that right? Dr. MArrHEIS. That is right. Mr. ERLEXBOIiN. In particular, is it correct tha.t~ you do not care for the 25-percent holdbaek from the funds and the ability of the PAGENO="0287" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1109 Office of Educat ion to contract with oruauizat ions other I haii the State department of educatioii with coniprehensive planning Dr. M.vrrHEIs. That is right. Mr. ERLENBORN. Would it. be fair to say you think this is the job of the State departments and not some outside organization? Dr. MATrHEIS. I would, sir. Mr. ERLENBORN. Relating to title IV. regional labs, with your feel- ing about State departments of education, do von think it is wholly consistent to support the regional hal) concept an(l also be in favor of strengthening State departments of education? Let me just give you this one example. The. State of Pennsyl- vania. for example, is served by three different, regional labs. Do you think this is maintaining the strength much less improvIng the strength of the department of education in the State of Pennsyl- vania? Dr. MArrnETs. I could not speak to the State of Pennsylvania. but I could speak generally with regard to title IV. I had some experience about it. originally and I think I accepted ultimately the philosophy that there was going to be in existence title IV and regional labs and therefore. I had better get involved in them on behalf of the State to protect our interests and I think many of us have done. this. I see some great problems in title IV anti its relationships to State departments of education in particular and perhaps ultimately even local school districts. So far, they have been organized with great participation by State departments and I think we look at this as an opportunity then t.o direct it so that this does not weaken State departments but I still have con- cern about it and I think you have identified them very well. Mr. ERLENBORN. If I get the impression from your prepared state- ment that you are in wholehearted support of the. regional lab concept., that impression is wrong. You do have some reservations? Dr. MATTHEIS. Yes, sir. Mr. ERLENBORN. Do you see any conflict in the fact that. the regional labs are established as nonprofit organizations free from tax limita- tions, spending limitations, of t.he State and Federal Governmnet? Do you see any conflict there with your State. departments of educa- tion and let me also add to this question the salary structure within the regional labs? Dr. MArrijEIs. I would not see any conflict., Mr. Congressman, with the first question. WTe have seen a few problems in the. second one and this relates to a comment Congresswoman Green made earlier in re- gard to the professional personnel in the school districts, leaving and so on. One of the situations certainly that has caused frustration and prob- lems for school districts and State departments of education has been the new Federal programs and the fact. that they have hired many of our programs away. Regional labs are in the same posit.ion where they have hired many of our very fine people away from the public school districts and State departments have to staff them and salaries have not been the pioblem with them t.hat it has been wit.h us. PAGENO="0288" 1110 ELE2~1EXTARY AND SECONDARY EDTCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. LELENBORN. I know across the country generally probably without exception. the director of the regional lab is paid far more i han the head of the state department of education or for that matter the direcor of the regional office of education or for that matter ~\Ir. howe himself, the Commissioner of Education. L that true in your area, as well Dr. ~\L~rrHEIs. I think it. would be true in most areas. In ours I think it is nearly a 2-to-i ratio. The school dist.rict in Minneapolis has a 2-to-i ratio with the. State commissioner of education. This goes back to some of the problems we worked with in a Sta.te alluded to earlier by Congressman B radernas. Mr. ERLENBORN. Is the most important. man in education the di- rector of the regional lab anti should we pay him more than anyone else? Dr. ~L~rrHEIs. I think some of these things get. a little out. of kilter when they are getting underway and t.he difficulty of getting a new program started has many difficulties. I worked with the regional lab for I-in recruiting a director. I also worked within t.he State in recruiting a director for the Higher Education Facilities Act, and the problems of recruiting people for these new programs are very great. As a result, very often they pay more than the going market in other areas of responsibility. We just. are not able to even get them otherwise. It is a supply and demand situation, and I think they just. have to p~y that if t.he pro- grams are going to be established at all. Mr. ERLENBORN. One last question on title IV. I find there seems to be a great. divergence of the mission of the regional labs. Is the regional lab in a better position to disseminate informa- tion than the Stat.e departments of education? Are they really doing the State's job when they do this? Dr. MArrIIEIS. I think I could concur with your assumption. 1 really do not see that they would be able to do a much better job than St.ate departments could or should. Again it boils down to the availability of funds in many instances where the State departments of education have not had funds avail- able from the St.ate resources to disseminate information. As a matter of fact Minnesota used a portion of their funds under title V to estab- lish a unit in our department of education for the dissemination of public information. I think we could do an excellent job if we had the resources to do it. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. O'Hara. Mr. O'HA~&. Dr. Matt.heis, you advocate a State plan for title I ESEA. Given the remarkable variances between the different kinds of school districts and different kinds of title I problems encountered by school districts: for instance, in your State, one located in the iliner city area of Minneapolis-St. Paul as compared to one located up in the Mesabi range as compared to one located in the southwestern ~ of the State., I wonder what advantages the St.ate plan would have over permitting local school officials to attempt to develop on their own a program that seems to be best suited for the. particular needs of the children in their own schools. Dr. MATTIIEIS. I think as I indicated, the prime advantage to this; because t.itl~ I i~ working relatively well now that w~ ~i~re ~mclerway; PAGENO="0289" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTJCATIOX AMENDMENTS 1111 would be the opportunity to eliminate some of the extraordinarily large, I feel, amount of paperwork and redtape that is involved now with the various application forms. I am convinced that with the State. plans we presently have in operation we would be able to elimi- nate a significant portion of this if a State plan were developed. It does not, have to be specific in many cases of requiring the infor- mation from one application to another that w-e presently have, No. 1, and we would also be able to control the timing of changes in the various forms that are used. This has caused us a problem particu- larly this year. .t think it just could be simplified if we have a State plan where we can work with the local school districts on the direction of the project in the State. Mr. O'HARA. Then you would not envision this State plan would involve any different distribution or any different activities than are presently carried on, is that right? Dr. MATTHEIS. That is just about correct in its entirety. I think there would be some things where we had a difficulty in the first year where we would have provided for in a State plan and that would have been the redistribution of funds. I would think under any State plan we would want. to provide for the distribution of funds not used by the school districts within the States. As I understand it this will not be completely cleared up and taken up in this fiscal year either where the distribution of funds t.hat are not used in a State are not made immediately available t.o ot.her dis- t.ricts in the State. I think this could be very easily provided for in a State plan but basically the mission of the act would not change it as I see it.. Mr. O'HAii~. Nor the kinds of activities carried on or the redistribu- tion of funds accepted. Dr. MArrHEI5. I think this is a basically correct idea; yes. sir. Mr. O'HARA. We could take care of that objection by putting a re- distribution formula right in there. Dr. MArrilEIs. Yes. Mr. O'HAn~. Title II provides for a State plan for administra- tion of title II. Tell me how do you administer title II in Minnesota? Mr. MATTHEIS. We administer it wit.h the State plan as you indicate and it. is primarily geared to a distribution modeled after our equaliza- tion formula for the public schools of the State which is based upon the wealth of the school district to support education, where the poorer school districts get the larger amounts of money and the richer school districts get a smaller amount. There are also some floors which are guaranteed something to all of the school distric.ts but. it is based primarily on the equalization aid formula that Minnesota has had for the past 10 years. Mr. O'J-TARA. `What happens in actual physical operation dealing with training materials? Dr. MArFHEIS. It is a simple matter for a school district indicating to us how they are going to spend their allotment.. The money allotted to Minnesota is worked out on the equalization aid principle and the school district is notified of the number of dollars available to them tinder this title, and they simply make an application to us from a list ~ 2-19 PAGENO="0290" 1112 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMEND~NTS of bibliographic materials as to how they are going to spend the money and tha.t is about all there is to it. Mr. OHAIt~. How do you handle the nonpublic? Mr. MArPITEIS. They work through the public school districts. It is mdicated how they are going to provide for the nonschool districts in their application. Mr. OH~u~. Under title II certain amounts may be used for ad- ministration expenses. What. happens to those dollars in Minnesota? Dr. MATTHEIS. They are spent for administration, Mr. Congress- man. We have found they are insufficient to cover all of the admin- istrative work of the title. This has been one of our concerns with it but we have. employed a number of staff people in the department of edu(at ion for the administration of it working with the school districts. Some of the school districts in our State have joined togeth'er to work out the program of application for funds and distribution of materials later oii on a joint procedure and they have used administrative funds of course. to iInl)le.ment it at. that level. I (lout, know that. I could be any more specific. Mr. (`YiL~A. Then the administrative, funds under the act are used by the State department of education and the local school dist.ricts? I)r. ~\L~rriTEIs. There is a provision for a local school district. t.o use an amount. of the funds available for a processing charge which I think includes administrative c.osts. Mr. O'J-L~n~~. The. State department of educat.ion does not do much a(lmini'1ermg. do they? T)r. M~\rrIIEis. I think we Mr. (YH~\R~~. You sit down with a pencil and apply your equaliza- t.ion formula in the State to the. amount available for the State and then von send out the checks. Dr. MATTIIETS. There are more things that. we do than this. We have set up a number of demonstration centers a.s a part. of the State involvement in this proeet and we have a. number of dernonstratioi~ centers for title II scattered around the Stat.e. We staff those. They are available for visit and consultation by local school district personneL giving them an opportunity to see what things may he purchaseL how a good resource unit might be set up. This is a. part of the administrative function as well. Mr. O'TIAliA. I notice a trend under title II which I hope is not. noticeable in your State. for the State plan to put most of the local ad- ministration over on local school district units and then keep the. ad- ministrative overhead money in the Sta.te department of education. That. has happened in a number of places, and it ends up with the local school units bearimnz the burden of administration and the State (leI)artment of e(lucat ion getting the money for it.. I hope that. is not j~oin~ on in Minnesota. (iiairmau PERKINS. Mr. Scherle. Mr. ScTIEnI.E. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. I think to begin with I would like to say that I have always had a great (teal of respect an(l admiration for the knowledge of Congress- uaii Q~iie in the field of education. I would also like, to compliment. (011 fine chairn an for this wonderful opportunity to hear the two witnesses this morning. I think in the hours we have spent in sessioli PAGENO="0291" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1113 that your testimony has been some of the finest and I compliment you both for it.. I would like to ask a question or two to follow the subject dwelled on previously in regard to Dr. Mattheis on page 4. on title II. You have misgivings in regard to title II and perhaps even its con- stitutionality in regard to the affiliation and entanglement. of church and state, is this true and if so in what. respect Dr. M~*rrnEIs. Yes, sir. I think in the. matter of the. loan of the books, the materials to the teacher and the child. I think in actual fact. the word loan is open for an awfully lot of discretionary judgment and use. I think it is used in many ways and many of them I think could be challenged very, very seriously. What a. loan means to one individual I think might l)e different from what. it would meaii to another. I think in actual piact ice and in fact the loan is such, as it is being implemented might not fit what many people call to be a loan and perhaps the courts might rule to be a loan. Mr. SCHERLr. Do you believe then in your own mind that there is a possibility that the money allowed to you in the form of Federal aid is being given to paiochial act ivitv that is not ciii itled to it Dr. ~L~rrrirjs. Only in this regard, Mr. Congressman. I think in the implementation of the act where a pub] c school (1 i~trict in cooper- at ion with tile nonl)ublic school purchases these resource materials and then loans them to the. teacher and child I think this is the area of the great discretion and perhaps discrepancy, where, in f~ict, I think in nia~iv of these cases then initially or ultimately it is working out to be a permanent loan situation and I think there are many who would question whether this is within the constitutionality of our State. Mr. SCIIERLE. In your State of Minnesota, do von 1)115 children? Dr. ~\L~rrIIEIs. W~e do not. I think the Minnesota con~titntion has been indicated to he one of the strictest in this area of expenditure of pul)lic funds for nonpublic schools. We (10 not piovide textbooks or other material for them either. ~\rr. SCHERLE. Do you anticipate any kind of litigation to cliahlen~e this Federal act? Dr. MArrHEIs. I dont know that I would say T would anticipate it. Mr. Congressman, but, I am not encouraging it though. If I may, Mr. Congressman, I should now interject because. that might. be taken to be too negative. The relationship we have had with tile public schools in Minnesota, and I think I)r. Brne is knowledge- able enough to speak to this, has been excellent and both in t itle II the way things have worked out. I have not heard anything particular about voicing questions of it or desire to put it through the court procedures. There are many people in our State who are aware of the fact that it. is working its way through the courts in sonic other States audi they are concerned about it, but I don't. think overly so at this point. Mr. SduuiLI~. Dr. Byrne would you like t.o comment on this ? Dr. BYRNE. I don't think I would really have too much to add to what. Mr. Mattlieis said. We know for example that there is a ques- tion of litigation in Pennsylvania and some other States. I have never heard the topic raised at all in the State of Minnesota. PAGENO="0292" 1114 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS I have never run across this as a problem, perhaps even to the extent that. Mr. Mattheis expressed it in this morning. Mr. ~CIIERLE. Xs long as these funds are made available, to the State board of public instruction, do you feel that children in parochial schools should be entitled to some of the benefits derived from the funds given by all taxpayers? I)r. MsrrnEIs. I think I would differentiate there, Mr. Congress- man. ~.)v saying I would not feel and I think this could really get us into some. very severe problems if we were to provide for from t.he general revenue of the State participation by the school districts. I think this would not be possible. The law passed allowing the State department of education to implement the elementary and sec- ondary education of l96~ specifically stated to implement it in accord with the Federal regulations, rules, and guidelines, and so on. We are using this authority to provide it then for the participation of the nonpublic school students and teachers. I think it would be completely different if we were to use State funds for such programs. Mr. SCIIERLE. You do realize though in some States they do use State funds to bus children from their point of embarkation to a paro- elijah school and this has been upheld by the Supreme Court. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Carey. Mr. CAREY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apologize for coming in late.. I flew down from New York this morning and my plane. was delayed. I hope on cursory re.ading I can get some hell) from time distinguished superintendent on his appre- herision about title II. I have a special interest in title II, having been one of the early proponents of textbook loans t.o all children. C an you be more specific about title II in your concern about the entanglement that you see in this title as you say on page 4? I frankly don't know what you are driving at. Dr. MArrrn~Is. I think it centers primarily around the word loan of these materials to children and teachers of nonpublic schools. In the actual administration and irnple.tneiitat.ion of this t.itle, I think there could be very easily some serious question raised as to whether in fact. this is a loan or not. Mr. CAREY. May I interrupt you at this point? Why do we have to deal in h'vpotheticals'? We are dealing in realities here. This is a law. You say there could be. Is t.here any clear cut or even appre- he.n cled violation in your State right, now? Dr. MArrIlEIs. I think, Mr. Congressman, without wanting to in- quire into it too specifically I think there are a number of the school districts if not in fact many of them which are in effect. making this a kind of permanent loan, whatever that phrase might be, versus loan which could indicate that. it is going to be returned to the public school and then loaned again or some such thing. Mr. CAREY. May I suggest. to the distinguished superintendent that von take the time to read the hearings of this committee which are most extensive on this point when we had discussed with leading constitutional authorities on both sides: namely, those in favor of textbook loans and those who were opposed. We spent a. great deal of time and energy on spelling out some sort. (-)f a param~ter that would guide us in this question of the, duration PAGENO="0293" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTCATION AMENDMENTS 1115 of the loan and we. came right, back to what I think would be your field of interest and that is the loan is for the period during which the st.udent~ and teacher would need to use the materials, whether textbook or audiovisual materials, in the l)resent.at.ion of the subject matter. Can you see anything wrong in this from the standpoint of edu- cational soundness? Dr. MArrHEIs. No, I can't but I think, Mr. Congressman, in actual implementation of it., I think it is not going to be adhered to that. closely. Mr. CAREY. May I suggest this is your responsibility. You admin- ister the Stat.e plan. I hope that you are familiar with the tightening amendments which I sponsored among others in the 1966 amendineiits. in those amendments we clearly set forth some guidelines for the State administrators of the State plan to loan textbooks so you could be more precise and a. great deal more meticulous in administering your State plan so that the very thing that you apprehend here. would not occur. Now in that we asked for a subdivision of administrative functions and moneys to accompany those functions so that. at the school district level and at other intermediate levels up t.o the State department of education you could police and you could in every way l)rotect the spirit and the letter of t.he act. I know in my own State for instance that. some of the monies that are used at the lower levels are used for the purpose of cataloging and actually physically storing the books at the end of the term period and restoring them to the central hook loan depository and tliiiig~ of this kind but this is necessary to protect the act and you have to do this. WTe gave von the direction-I clont want to use the term direction- we gave you the guideline and the money and the l)owe1~ in the act in 1966 to protect against the very same thing which you seem to appre.- hend as a. danger in the act in your statement on page 4. Now what. more do you need? Dr. MArrI-JEIS. I think, Mr. Congressman, we are well aware of the amendments and are doing what we think is our best to try to imple- ment~ them. There are many problems associated with this and I think the Congressman from Minnesota is aware of the fact the number of school districts which we have which compound it signiflcantlv. I can only say we fully intend t.o comply with and to have our school districts comply with it.. I am only concerned about the fact. that we are going to he unable to do it in fact in the letter of the law. We a.re doing our best and I think the school districts have a real feeling that they intend to carry it out and we do, too, but. there are these detailed problems that. I have some concern about. Mr. CAREY. I think it was Judge Frankfurter who once. said where questions of social policy is concerned, preoccupation with fringe areas of constitutionality are not in the spirit, of free people. Now for goodness sake is it so complicated we can't work the situa- tions out to get the books then into the hands of the children who need them and still protect. the spirit of the constitution? It is not that tough a job, is it? Wit. and ingenuity of administra- tors is far greater than that of legislators and I think it can be worked out. PAGENO="0294" 1116 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Dr. MArrHETS. I appreciate your confidenc.e. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. i)elle.nback. Mr. DELLEXBACK. Just to be sure I got an answer given earlier cor- rectly I would like to ask you both this one question again, if teacher training funds were made (hrectly available to the respective areas with which von are concerned rather than through the Teacher Corps, do von feel so far as the recruitment of new teachers is concerned there would be iio failing oil of new teachers in the areas covered by the Teacher Corps Dr. M\rrTIv!s. I would respond by saving I could not. foresee an falling off. 1 think as 1 indicated earlier in particular St. Paul and Minneapolis when title I became. available they began a recruitment pro~rra1n for these types of individuals and I think they were over- whel med with response. l)r. byliNE. I would agree. with Mr. Ma.ttheis. Mr. DrI~I~ENii.~c1~. I listened with interest to the comment. that has been made through the course. of these hearings and the argument made. in days when you gentlemen were. iiot here that. it seems that the fact that State departments have not performed in the past is taken some to be. conclusive evidence that they would not perform in the fut ii re. I (lout accept that. I think the mere fact that. some. areas have not been covered in the past does not. mean the would not henceforth in the future l)e covered and I appreciate particularly the remark Dr. Mattheis made on this that there is a signficant. new factor which is present today wh~chi was not. present before, and that, is the substantial infusion of Federal funds. Against, that background I would ask on both this, because you have 1)0th spoken in terms of block grants being superior to categori- cal aid. If we were to move forward at this stage and make additional block grants of funds available, what would be the. top priority uses to which those funds would be put in the State of Minnesota, Dr. Mattheis? Dr. ~L~i'TIrE1s. I think. Mr. Congressman, there might be two or three priorities. I am not sure which would ultimately receive. the highest luority. I think l)eT'11111)s the. first would l)e. a. significantly lar~er degree, of attention to fi'ie proi)lenls of the large cities. `We are gving this attention in a unml)er of ways in Minnesota and I think many of them inadequate but I think tins would 1)e certainly very, very high on the prioi~ity that some attention be given to these prol)iems. A second, and we referred to this earlier in the. course of discussion, would he related to teachers, attracting them to the profession, keeping them in. the profession once they are prepared to become teachers, teachers salaries, working conditions, and whatever, and the third and I am not. sure but. what. I should have mentioned it first. because of the interest and work of the chairman, would he. in the interest of school buildings. capital outlay. construction funds for school districts. Those are the priorities T could see. for the use of the funds in 1)lock grant. fornis. Mr. DELLENBACK. Do you feel there would still be a moving forward in the field of education in the State of Minnesota rather than a leveling PAGENO="0295" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTCATION AMENDMENTS 1117 off in the utilization of these funds to reduce present taxation in the State? Dr. i\L~rrIIEIs. Certainly the efforts indicated over past years in Minnesota has indicated they have and are still willing to make the contribution to education and I would see no-I have not seen in history at least any indication that they would slackeii the pace of support for education. Mr. DELLENBACK. Could you add anything to that, Dr. Byrne? Dr. BYRNE. I would agree with what has been said and I think I would say I feel the funding should go to the disadvantaged because we have some of the most (lisadvantaged people in the State of Minnesota. Mr. DELLENBACK. To perhaps i1o~ the ground once more, you feel that if we were to move forward with the new factor of additional Federal money this would be imaginatively, immovatively, advantage- ouslv used within the State of Minnesota rather than resulting in a tapering off of this kind of work? Dr. M~rrHIas. It would be my feeling it would be, but it would not completely eliminate as I tried to indicate in my testimony the possi- J)ilitv for some slippage or spoilage along the way, some trial and error effect. I am sure there might he some programs that would he devised that would not spend the funds entirely as efficiently and expeditiously as some people might desire but I think on the whole it would be worth this problem with the end product the effort and the strengthening of the states in the educational area. Mr. DELLENBACK. WTith the pressure of time being on us, iimy I ask one more question of you both about this because I personally think this concept of using the States as laboratories to come lip with ideas is a good one if the factor of dissemination of advantageous ideas is truly followed through on after State X comes up with a good plan, it just does not stay in State but goes to all of the other 49 States. Do you have any suggestions relative to the improvement of dissemi- nating ideas? Is the job being well done now? Dr. MArrIIEI5. It is being done very well. The information really is more available than we are able to use because of oppresslve duties and time. I suppose the phrase we are not doing as well as we could have. a.s I indicated in Minnesota, we employed people under title V to prove it can be improved significantly. Mr. DELLENBACK. `Would you agree with that, Dr. Byrne? Dr. BYRNE. Yes, sir. Mr. SCHEtJER. I would be happy to yield my time. to Congressman Meeds. Chairman PERKINS. May I ask that you not utilize that time so we could get through here? I failed to put the other witnesses on. `We have them from New York and different places, California. and let the other members-the other witnesses make their statements before any witness if von want to use it go ahead and use it. Mr. MELDS. I will finish my questioning in 5 minutes. Mr. Commissioner, I was somewhat distressed with several of your statements. Now I am referring to page 10. I would also like to com- ment on something noticeably absent when you came through with a PAGENO="0296" 1118 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS very strong 1)1e~1 for changing Ileadstart to the U.S. Office of Educa- tion and their inclusion as an integral part of title I, ESEA. May I reniind you, sir, under the present provisions of title I, ESEA. if the. piesent prohibitions in the law were there that approxi- mately 30 percent of the. I-Ie.adst.art programs in this United States and 10 percent of the. students presently being served by those programs would be. ineligible. Are you aware of that? Dr. MArnIETs. I think they would not be unavailable. Particu- larly it is a matter in how they have been administered but this would not. make them particularly unavailable for the future as I see it. Mr. MEEDS. You recognize the need of operating this through the Office. of Economic Opportunity t.o avoid some of the state-church problems. You spoke about. church-state problems in your State and Indicated that it had one of the strongest constitutional prohibitions against infringement of this provision, is that right? Dr. MArrHEIS. Yes, sir. Mi.. MEEDS. Do you think that if the Federal Government were to make funds available t.o you for just the category of Headstart that you would, through your department of education, be able to contract. with a parochial school to run a Headstart program in that school? Dr. MxrniEIs. I don't. know that this would be possible, sir. Mr. MELDS. I don't think it could. Dr. MArrnEIs. The reason I am placing this in here is because I could foresee the Headst.art. and followt.hrough programs being oper- ated the way our kindergarten programs are operated now where we serve all of the children of all of the people. Mr. MEEDS. 1)o you have State-supported kindergarten programs that. support. the parochial study? Dr. MxrrlIEIs. The. non-public-school students a.ttend the public kin- dergarten during that year and then they transfer to the nonpublic or parochial school for the first year. Mr. MEEDS. Do you operate any of those in private institutions? Dr. MA'rrITEIs. No, sir. Mr. MEEDS. Do you feel you could under provisions of your law? Dr. MxrrHEis. No, sir. I would say they would be entirely pub- lic operated. Mr. MEEr)s. Do you have any Headstart. programs in your State which are being operated in parochial or private institutions? Dr. MArrHEIS. Yes, sir. Mr. MEEDS. Then under your law those Ileadstart programs would not be available to the students that. are taking them? Dr. MvrruEls. Not in the form they are but I would cont.end they coiil(l be very easily transferred to the educational institutions in the various communities and operated through them. Mr. MEEDS. So you feel you are not completely utilizing your facilities in Minnesota ; is that right? Dr. MvITIIEIS. I WOUl(l not go so far as to say that. I think facili- ties would be made available, for those programs as they are for the kindergarten programs and the expansion of those, the construction of facilities, whatever, however the needs demand. Mr. MEEDS. Would they require any additional building? PAGENO="0297" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1119 Dr. M~~rrnEIs. It could in many cases. Mr. MEEDS. 1)o -you think you would be able to get that off the ground prior to the next year's operation of Headstait Dr. MA'rrHEIs. I think Mr. Congressman this would be a situation relative to the expansion of kindergartens in our various communi- ties where there might be various ways that would have to l)e. imple- mented initially to take care of the program, temporary facilities, whatever, and then a program of working into construction. Mr. M~us. It is very likely in your State if the proposal were adopted even in your own State, and incidentally not oniy in your State but in others, there are many children who would not have the value of Headst art programs. Dr. MArruEIs. I would not make such an assumption. I think if we were given the opportunity we could do the job. Mr. M~ns. We have the problem of legislating for the entire United States on this program and it is the opinion of most of the members of the conunittee, I think-there would be grave problems in implementing what. you have siigge~ted. I am certainly in agree- mnent with your statements and the (hrection which you are. evidently heading when you say you have been and are becoming increasingly an advocate of strong general aid rather than categorical aid for elemen- tarv and secondary education and you make a strong plea for such assistance. I think this is the direction we would all like to go. However, again, may I ask you this: Assume that the Office of Education through the Federal Government were to make. funds available to you for general education in the State of Minnesota, do you feel that you (ould operate presently and serve the students of parochial schools which are now being served under the categorical aid of title I, title II, title III of t.he Elementary and Secondary Education Act as it is now written? Dr. MA'rrHEIs. I think Mr. Congressman, it would depend upon the Federal legislation and the terminology of it as to how strong it was in that area and then whether the State gave us the authorit to nfl- plement it in reco~nition of the guidelines of the Federal Government. I think there would be some opportunity for problem~ yes, sir. Mr. MEEDS. Aside from the problem of passing through the Congress a general aid to education bill, considering the constitutional problems at the Federal level, assuming we could do that, don't von foresee a great number of problems in your State. with your State. constitu- tion and in other States with a general aid to education provision, moneys from the Federal Government in serving low-income students or anv students in parochial institutions? Dr. MATrHEIS. Yes, sir. Mr. MEEDS. So a lot of the parochial students who are now partici- pating in categorical aid under the Federal program might be. cut out if von are suggesting-if your suggestions were adopted, isn't that correct.? Dr. MArmEIS. I would assume this would be likely, Mr. Congress- in an. Mr. MEEDS. I was also interested in another one of your statements and I hope I am not doing you an injustice when I paraphrase and at least tell you that the idea I got from your testimony was that you felt PAGENO="0298" 1120 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION A~NDMENTS that the reasons that there had not been the breakthrough in education and the attention paid to economically deprived children is the States' lack of leadership and lack of funds; is that correct? Dr. ~%L~rrnEIs. Yes, it is prevalent in either or both situations. Mr. MEEDS. Let me tell you we have heard a. number of admmistra- tors and State school officers testify to this same effect so you are not alone in this. In this line of reasoning, however, I would just like to ask you if you think the State of Minnesota prior to the adoption of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. has been doing enough in your larger cities, Minneapolis and St. Paul, in educating the eco- nomically deprived children? Dr. MArrHEIs. I did allude to it. earlier in response to a question. I am not aware as significantly as fine a job being done in Minneapolis as in St. Paul. St. Paul previously had Dr. Forrest Conner. I think he and their board were excellent, leadership, did a very fine job of beginning this program of work in the core city of St. Paul with both exceptional staff and recruitment of staff and additional funds to be placed into these schools. Mr. MEEDS. So your answer would be you have done enough? Dr. MATTI-IEIS. The answer is "Yes and no." We have done some very fine things prior to the enactment. Mr. MEEDS. Don't you think, however, in the final analysis when you people come in here and talk about a lack of leadership and a lack of funds that it. is a question of priorities within your State as to what you do with your educational programs prior to the enactment of ESEA? Dr. ~L~rr1'TEIs. Yes, sir; and no more than it is the Federal level setting priorities. Mr. MEEDS. If we found, as a matter of fact., then in this committee that there had not been enough throughout this Nation for the educa- tion of economically deprived children, don't you think we ought to do something about that. problem and provide some leadership and some funds? Dr. MArPHETS. Yes, sir. Mr. MEEDS. And it is a problem that has not been taken care of? Dr. MATFHEIS. Not. sufficiently well. ~\[r. MEEI)s. It had not been given the priority it needed, sir? Dr. MA'PTHETS. Ies. Mr. MEEDS. Isnt it also true with the Federal help we still have not solved the problem, and we have not sufficiently taken care of the economically deprived child? We have not done it before. and we have not done it yet. Dr. Mxrrijris. We have a way to go. Mr. GARDNER. I would like to explore this a little bit more. We seem to have a variance of thinking on the committee. It would seem to me the. big problem facing the States throughout the country has been a lack of funds. The distinguished gentleman from Michigan in the questions he asked you seemed to harp on leadership. I think the big lack has been in the area of funds. It seems to me a majority of our States seem to operate on a sounder financial basis than doe.s the. Federal Government. I don't think I could include the State of Michigan in this group. PAGENO="0299" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDITCATION AMENDMENTS 1121 Would you comment on this if you had to mention the two between leadership and fund, which would be more important? Dr. MArrITEIS. I think I would give priority in the problem area to theY funds. I think this is indicated in title ITT, as for mstance, where this is an innovative situation, and I think Minnesota and many other States exemplified the kind of leadership and thinking that is avaih able in the States when given an opportunity. We had more projects and new ideas thrown out than anyone ever guessed we could. I think the leadership is there not to the degree we would want, but there is plenty of leadership. Mr. GARDNER. If the proper funds were available for the State in the same amounts that the Federal Government has been giving in grants-in-aid programs, do you think the State could do a better job of administering these programs compared with the Federal Govern- ment, and why? Dr. M~&rrHEIs. It would be my opinion, Mr. Congressman, that we could do equally as good a job. I think most studies in research and education that we come out with about equal or as good a job, but rarely can we prove conclusively that one way of doing it is better than another, but with this very important difference that we would still then be maintaining a higher legree of respect and integrity for the State and the development of State institutions and legally constituted agencies within the. State to do the job. I think it could be done equally as well with ability in guarantee to develop and continue the agencies that are existing within the States to do those jobs. Mr. GARDNER. On page 10 of your testimony you say you strongly support Federal aid for elementary and secondary education. Would you want to change this statement if we went into a Federal tax-shar- ing plan with various States and the money were available to the State? Dr. MATrHEIs. Would I want to change the statement? Mr. GARDNER. Yes. Dr. MArrHEIS. No, sir; I would think that the tax-sharing plan, Mr. Congressman, that. is being talked about would be a satisfa~tory and desirable way of getting Federal dollars back to the. States. I have a high degree of confidence in the way the public education has been dealt with in Minnesota, that education would receive a due portion of any Federal funds that were returned to the State on a tax-sharing program. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Stei ger. Mr. STETGER. Thank you. Mr. Chairinaii. I will be just as brief as possible so we can get the other witnesses on. You made a very eloquent statement.. Let. me just ask a couple of things. ~Xrchie Buckmiller, the deputy superintendent of schools in W~iscon- sin. made a presentation to Mrs. Green~s suhconuinittee and title II was touched on. One of the concerns that they expressed was, and I will quot.e here "that the Federal Government seems to be beiiding towards even greater specificity and administrative control in its educational control programs. Descript.ive detail narrows the option available to PAGENO="0300" 1122 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS State agencies and school districts." They went. on to cite title II which says the State should consider in its guidelines the geographic library which runs counter to Wisconsin's concept of trying to provide daily access to the material through a library at each school. Have you found in Minnesota ally of these same kinds of difficulties? I)r. M~rrllEIs. Not particularly. I think we have worked out these to our satisfaction in the develop- ment. of our State plan. We do not have the same plan as far as the regional situation as Wisconsin does and maybe `this is why we have not experienced difficulties, but I would say difficulties experienced iiiider title II have been very, very mmimal in working out our State p1 au. Mr. ~TE1GEFi. ~~oli indii~itecl in your testimony, and I share your con- cciii about title IlL and it. was suggested yesterday by the National Education Association that perhaps we ought. to go to a 75-percent State plan operation, ~ ~eree~ imder the Commissioner of Education f~r the (lirection of title III funds. What. would be your reaction to that. concept? Dr. MATTIIEIS. I would not particularly support that concept, Mr. Congressman. I could see no reason why this should be of siguiifieant advantage or importance in carrying out the intent, of the title. I think it. can be done on a 100-percent basis to the States. I don't conceive that this 25 percent is going to do much if anything above and beyond the intent of the law tha.t could not. l)e done with any 100- percent funding t.o tile State. ~\[r. ~TEl(;ER. T)o von share a concern expressed b some of the wit- nesses before this committee as well as some of tile members of tile committee about. tile idea that is contained in several portions of H.R. 62~0 for educational agencies included in it.s definition, other public, nonprofit agencies to meet the needs and so forth? Do you think this is a. good trend for us to go t.o outside the educational agencies? Dr. ~\L\TTT[ETS. Mr. Congressman, in responding I would say I think the trend of using these agencies is excellent. I would see, however, that the responsibility for working with those agencies should he at the State and not the Federal level. I think that if the funds are given to the State and then the State has tile opportunity to contract with various agencies. t.his is one thing, biut to have that contracting (lone from the Federal level is something completely different. T would support tile option being made avail- able. to the States, but not. the Federal. Mr. STEIGER. One last question. \Vhat is your own reaction. and T am reading from your statement. I gather that you support tile regional labor concept. My problem with the re~rional lab i'eallv is what this does to the Statc (lepartmeilt. 1)eea use they are outside of any constitutional or lcoislative or auìy other ~uide1ines, or requirements for salaries and so forth. Does this tend to weaken State departments because von will draw people out. of them into the regional lab rather than trying to strengthen the State department of education ? Ts thus a pl'ol)lem Dr. ~\L~rrurEls. In responding to it. and. I think, the questions was raised a little earlier, I would only reaffirm tile material I said then. I have ~reat concern about it and I dud1 originally when if was introduced. PAGENO="0301" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTCATION AMENDMENTS 1123 In sort of a self-protection for the Department of Education, I think, all of us around the country became very involved in them and in their direction and in the setting up of these regional laboratories feeling if we are part of the guiding force of it at least we would be participating in the decisions to be made within it. I still have some concern about it. I am not sure these things could not be reasonably well done at the State leve.l in each case. We have an upper midwest laboratory in our area and the chief State school officers of the state participating are represented on the executive group deal- ing with decisiomnaking policies. We have some reservations about it but we had a reasonable degree of assurance that it was going to be established, so we got in there to Participate in it. and help direct it. However, I think w-e had some. questions about. its future. Mr. Si~io~. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you, Doctor Mattheis and Doctor Byrne for your appearances here today. We are not by any means excusing you, but we are. going to let you stand aside inasmuch as we now have other witnesses who wish to make a general statement.. When we reconvene after lunch, you will sit at the table with the other witnesses as a panel for further questioning. Mr. QUIE. I would like to add my word of thanks, too, for the excellent statements you have made, very provocative and you have served a very worthwhile function here. I would also like to say for Commissioner Mattheis who is in the public eye in Minnesota. ~ Byrne, you have made what. I think is the best statenient that has been made here on this whole topic of the elementary and sec- O1i(lary school. I recognize that a prophet is not even safe within his OWU country. 1 wish every member of the Legislature in Minnesota could have heard you today, and they would have been mighty impressed with the work you have done. Mr. BELL. Mr. Chairman, from sunny California, the largest. State in the Union, we have today two very distinguished guests who will be testifying, Dr. Ernest Willenberg, l)reSident of the Council for Ex- ceptional Children, Los Angeles, Calif., would you come forward, Dr. Willenberg, and Dr. Bruce Miller, superintendent of schools of River- side, Calif. 1 would like to take this opportunity. Dr. Willenberg, to welcome you to the committee. \Ve know of your excellent record in Los Angeles. Mr. SCHEUER. I have three witnesses I would like to introduce. Chairman PERKINS. Dr. William C. Greer, executive secretary, Council for Exceptional Children, would you come around to the table, also? Msgr. James C. Donohue, director, Department of Education, Na- tional Catholic `Welfare Conference and Mr. John Cicco. Inasmuch as t.he gentlemen from New York have to leave in just a few moments, the witnesses from New York in the order that. Mr. Scheuer wants them to proceed will proceed with a general statement. Mr. ScTIEului. Dr. Niemeyer and Dr. Gordon Klopf ~uicJ Mrs. Williams. PAGENO="0302" 1124 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS I am very pleased and honored to have such educational adventurers and leaders down here. I use that word "adventurers" in the most exciting meaning of the word. I am sure your testimony is going to prove useful and constructive for all of us. I might say that among the programs that Dr. Nie.meyer and Dr. Iklopf have particil)ated in has been a program involving pareiit outreaches. and since, all four of my children went to the Bank Street School and since their outreaches projected me into this great body, I feel that on really brought the parent average, concept to its full fruit ion many years ago. \Vitli those words, I greet you, welcome you and look forward to what you are going to tell us. STATEMENT OF JOHN H. NIEMEYER, PRESIDENT, BANK STREET COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, ACCOMPANIED BY MRS. VERONA WILLIAMS AND DR. GORDON KLOPF Mr. ~IEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Scheuer, gentlemen of the com- mittee, it is a pleasure to listen. Not only do we hear the spendid presentation from this paiticimlar table, but. if Congressman Scheuer owes hms hmiowleclge and perception about education to the education of his own children, I am sure all of you have had children in very excellent, schools. Mr. SCHETER. Dr. Nieme.yer, would you qualify yourself and Dr. h1o1)f ~ Mr. NIi~IEYER. I am the. president of the Bank Street College of Education which is a graduate school training liberal arts graduates, mostly for service in slums aiicl slum schools in the inner cities, the big cities. Mv organization is a research center which has been at. work through formal research and experimental projects since 1916, trying to under- stall(l the whole teaching-learning process in the institution called the school. I have with me today two colleagues, one on my left, the person called by Mr. Scheuer. the star witness is Mrs. Williams. We wanted, in spite of the temptation, to talk on all aspects of the alnefl(llflents and tIme bill, we wanted tocla to try to bring t.o this com- mittee perhaps just a little hit deeper understanding of the whole educational aide, the nonprofessional school aide. area of work. Mrs. Williams is such an aide who has come up in the public, school system of ~ew York and isan educational aide in P.S. 1, which is down in the Lower East Side. She also serves on the. advisory committee to a study of the whole question of the training of nonprofessional auxiliaries which are being carried aim at the Bank street with OE() funding by Dr. Klopf and other associates. This study is attempting to follow and to give nurture to and to get dissemination among and from the 15 OEO sponsored training programs for aid scattered across the country. Therefore, Dr. Klopf who has been at. this for a. couple of years brings a good deal of rather (leep understanding of this and Mrs. IVilliams. who has served on the advisory committee, brings the under- PAGENO="0303" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1125 standing that she has gained from study and also her personal experi- ence as an aid. I think perhaps I ought. to say just. one bit about Bank Street for you so you will know the background out of which we talk. W~e are deeply involved in teacher training, l)ut we are more con- cerned with the whole question that has been raised here today by many of you which is how do you get dissemination. how do you get change, how do you get improvement because it is very telling, the question which says "well, if a concern with a disadvantage is long overdue, where. have the States been? Where have the school systems been ?" One answer, of course, and it. is partly a legitimate answer, is that there have not been the funds. On the other hand, many of us who are out in the field working in school systems and studying them find that even where there seems to be plenty of funds, the funds are not. used wisely and changes are not made to try to bring about new p1~act1ces that will lead toward the goal which everybody agrees is important. which is to tr to bring into the American stream of life about .~0 percent of the children of America who today are coming out of our schools, a large proportion of them, ill-trained for productive lives in society and many of them already doomed to what I call permanent unemployability in our society. WThen vou think that. in the large system in which we work in perhaps 250 elementary schools, S5 percent of the children at the end of the seventh grade are retarded in reading and, I would guess, at least 50 percent of these are so retarded that they cannot possibly do successful secondary e(iucation work. It becomes apparent that this is an advance problem, a difficult problem, a complex prol)lem. The first point, of two I would like to make today, and perhaps I can make other points in the questioning period after lunch, is first, in spite of the difficulties and in spite of the problems which you men and w-omen are as concerned about, and certainly even more know-I- edgeable about than most of us who work in certain areas of the country, in spite of that, there is. and in spite of what I just said about the tremendous job still to be clone, there is, as I have said in my written testimony. abroad in the land today a spirit and a movement among educators and all of the other people who are becoming more interested in education and the work of the school which gives great hope. The first. summer that Ijeadstart. came into New York, the public school program was opened and almost no children appeared. The school system realized that the schools really have never known how to get. in touch with the. children of really disadvantaged, disorganized, alienated, pooi~ families, hut. they got to work and iv the. end of the first year the school system had intro(lucedl 1)e1~so1~1~el who got out to the homes. They had more home visiting going on. and lw the time the second summer came around a difierent situation occurred. This required change. I would just like to point out the change in the educational estal)hislunent is no more (liffi(ll11 , hut T am sure. it is no less difficult for the people in that estal)l isl~meiit than it is for any establishment that on can think of. any lmreaucracv. ( liange takes PAGENO="0304" 1126 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS place very slowly. We all have ways of working and we continue to use those ways and it. takes a great deal of dynamite sonmtimes, intellectually and from the standpoint of funding and so on to make us cliaiige our ways of behavior. This is a deep concern of all of our studies and work in fact, in our teacher education work at Banks Street we. are concentrating now upon teams of teachers and administrators from various parts of the count ~ who come for workshops, and we try to work with them and dlevelol) with them ideas with which they can go back to their home towns and States and bring about some of these changes which really have to take place. The chairman would be pleased to know a team from Louisville, Ky., will he at Banks in this summer as well as Atlanta, Cleveland, Hart- ford. Miiumn, and various pai~s of the country. T would say it is difficult to bring about. the. change but I think some change is taking place., and that. leads me. t.o the second point, and that is the support we would like, to give-I am not very good on all of these titles and I get confused about. them-but that part of the amendments which would permit States to set up planning and evalu- at ion agencies. I will certainly go along with the Commissioner from Minnesota~ who said that. the State organization should not, be by- passed. They should be used more fully. The local areas need to be used more fully. While I support this amendment, I should like to interject at the beginning a statement in support. of what. we have now. I a.m a great believer in not letting any one establishment have t.he whole show. That is why I would hope that. I-Ieadstart would not be put into the Office of Education and under title I. It may belong in the depart- nient, hut I would hope that it could be set up in some. w-ay so that some of the influence of the people who had the original vision in OEO and Sliriver, and so on, could still have an influence upon this~ l)e(ause we see evidence all the time of a State department having a good influence upon the. local system, of the. local system having a good influence upon time State and both of these being influenced by guide- lines and l)v requirements and by encouragement. out of the Federal GovernmentS and I mean beyond money. I mean encouragement. of ideas, because our profession-and I have been in education all of my adult. life-my profession is just like other professions-very, very slow t.o change and we do need the influence from all of these sources. However, having said that, I do feel tha.t a great. deal more plan- ning needs to be done at the St.ate level. I think this is a capital idea that is being proposed to encourage and make it possible for the States to set. up these planning, these State planning and evaluat- ing agencies and to require that among the things which they will do will be concern for new programs, new horizons, new ventures. That. leads me to the point which I hope we will be able to spend most of our time on in the time allotted us: namely, one of our interests in such planning groups at. the Sta.te level and these new programs is that. such bodies pledge to try to implement and devise and to implement new programs that one of the. new programs which they certainly will have to get. into is t.his program of the t.raining of school aids, the nonprofessional personnel. PAGENO="0305" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTATION AMENDMENTS 1127 Now, for the past 2 years we have been studying in but we have also been bringing the people who are in these training programs to- gether, people from school systems, people from outside the agency, in labor, in industry, and so on, together to find out and to learn from them and we find that certain things are true. We find that the aid program is successful where the following conditions are obtained: 1. Where the role of the aid is not defined in a rigid fashion, but is defined in the way Mrs. Williams has had, with the flexibility, with the taking advantage of the particular interests and the ability that she has and the needs of the particular kids in that particular school. 2. We find that this does no good unless the teachers are trained how to use aids and the aids have a continuing training program- they are not dumped into taking off overshoes or picking up papers. 3. When the school looks upon the aid as a career and, if possible, a career with ladders so that people who want to, can climb up the rungs of these ladders to better positions. In the very short time we have known Mrs. Williams, we have seen this tremendous growth toward becoming a real professional. Yet she started over as a housewife who was just interested in kids and wanted to help. 4. We find that it is pretty essential, and you would subsume this, I would imagine, that the aids be in schools where the schools and the school system believes that every adult in the school is important in the life of a child, from a janitor or th~ custodian, the cook, up to the superintendent of schools. They are all a part of a. team, all influencing the lives of children and youth. Where. that attitude exists, we find that the aid program is extremely important. `Where these conditions do not obtain, either in toto-and in some places they don't obtain at all though they have aids~-t.hen we find that really the advantage of this for the children and for learning seems to be very slight indeed. Personally, I do not pretend to know what should or should not. be in the legislation. But I would hope that in some way the influence of the committee could be exerted if an amendment does go through Congress and that this influence would be thrown behind stimulating in relation to the aid training program and would be toward stimulat- ing the use of the research which has been done by this national corn- inittee that happens to be located at the Bank Street College of Educa- tion about this w-hole program because I come back to another point and with that I am finished. There is no question about it that there just is not very much dis- semination. Things happen that are important here and they are not even known in the same school system let alone in another part of the country. This is a problem which we should address ourseives to, we are trying to at my level, but it is a universal problem which is of great. importance. Now, I had hoped that Mrs. Williams would be able to tell you, Mr. Chairman, some of her experiences. Perhaps that would best 1)e (lone if done as the result of questions, but she has gone to a lot of work to prepare a beginning statement and if you would like to have her do that, she is prepared to do so. 75-492-67--pt. 2-20 PAGENO="0306" 1128 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTTCATION AMENDMENTS Chairman Prriiiixs. If there is no objection, her statement will be inserte(l in the record and if you care to summarize it, it would cer- to in expedite the hearing. Mrs. WILLL\MS. Mr. Chairman, Members of Congress, I am a school aide employed at P.S. 1, by the Board of Education. Some of my duties are, one, I am primai~ily a library aid, which means processing all books that come into the school whether through E~EX OI through library funds and also stimulating the interest of children where they read for enjoyment and not because it is a chore. In doing this. I have, been able to raise the reacTing level of some chiT- iremi and also in helping children that have remedial retardation in reading. I had one little Chinese boy who arrived from Hong Kong who had a difficulty reading problems and he was reading at the third grade level while he was ri the fifth grade. I helped him. If a test is given an(l a clIil(l does not know iiow to read-mark he cannot pass the test. Also the silent "b." ITe~ did not know how to pronounce the word ~lamb," and also the magic `~e" where the magic "e" becomes use. No teacher has enough hands to give every chulci the individual atten- tion they need. This was one of my duties. Also, in the morning, receiving prekindergarten, kindergarten and first-grade children. It is very important to the parents to be able to leave these hildreii in school with peilce of mind. These children caine to me. in the morning, leave their mothers. It has been a wonderful experience. \Ve have a w-orking community. Parents are now asking what can they (10 to help improve their chil- iiiens reading al)ility. what is curriculum, something that wa.s never asked before by palemts. Also, if a. child has a~ problem bothering them they cami conic to on and ask you and you can relate to them and speak to them on their level. I also act as liaison between school and parents. I could go on forever about the things that have gone on in school. It has been re- wanting to miie and also I think the school has gained something from it. I would like to think that aids are responsible for this. I will also help with the barking of the school, taking care of book- keeping, also in ordering supplies for the school. I don't think there is anything that an aid could (10 except in a professional field that I couldi not qualify for. The only reason I couldn't qualify is because i aiii not a professional. (~hmairnian Pun~ixs. Thank you very much for your eloquent state- meat. Mr. NIrMEYFR. Pr. Kopf is the dean of the college and he would like to make a comment. Mr. Korr. I think I would like to support the amendment dealing with greater planning on the part of States. I think a ver basic ingredient to this, however, is not only more leadership on the State level, but using some national guidelines or some national leadlership ill this direction to assist States in their p1a rim i ng. I serve right now as chairman and follow through the national planning committee for the Office. of Education and we have a team working from all over the country \corking on this program. I feel PAGENO="0307" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTATION AMENDMENTS 1129 very strongly that States can have resources from national leadership, both in the U.S. Office of Education and from other States and from other institutions throui~hoiit the country. Although I sul)port very strongly greater p~JIlung on the part of States, I think included this planhil iiii~ plus the leadership from throughout the count rv whether it is from the F.S. Office of Educat ion or other hnstitutiolls. I think that IIea(lstart is really ~ne I consider the great examples or great innovations on the national level of the past 10 or 1~ years in education. This was a national program and it was 1)0th! initiated and implemented on a national level through local areas. To what degree some of you know more the stipulations of followthrough, this 1)e1'1~l)5 wOul(l be a eoml)ination. ~nother major concerii of mine has been the study of the MDTA training institute. I think you were sent copies of reports we (lid~ at Bank Street 2 years ago. The difference from the assistance at the national level, these institutes as we looked at them two different tinies, through national leadership, through national assistance, I think, has been very, very significant. Programs in States, cities, and the institu- tions as Mr. Nieniever said, has to be a combined approach. %Ve have to work it together, but we do need more State planning with greater leadership and richer leadership on the part of the States. (Mr. Niemeyer's prepared testimony follows:) TESTIMONY BY JOHN H. NIEMEYER, PRESIDENT BANK STREET COLLEGE OF EDUCATION Ladies and gentlemen, I wish to thank Chairman Perkins for inviting me to testify before this morning on the Elementary and Secondary Education Act Amendments of 1967. With his I)ermissioil I am accompaiiied by two of my colleagues: Mrs. Verona Williams who is an ai(le in the New York City Public School System and a member of the Advisory Commission for the Bank Street Study of Auxiliary Personnel in Education, and Dr. Gordon Klopf who is the Dean of the Faculties at Bank Street and is co-director of the Study. Dean Klopf is also currently serving as Chairman of the committee here in Washington planning policy and guidelines for Project Follow- Through. Our plan, with your permission, is that I shall make a brief statement, and will then ask Mrs. Wil- hams and Dean Klopf to speak. following wlli(lI we should be glad to try to answer questions which members of the Committee may wish to address to us. Perhaps it would be helpful if first I said something about the work of Bank Street College of Education so that those of you who are not familiar with our program will know the experience and professional concerns from which we speak. Bank Street is solely a graduate school for the training of early child- hood and elementary teachers and supervisors. and a research center which from its inception in ThiG has been seeking ways for improving the teaching- learning process. We work tlirou~h highly formal research and through field experiments. As part of the latter, we have conducted for many years an experi- mental laboratory school, operate a day-care center for the Welfare Department of New York City, and have for the past two years been attempting to develop on the Wrest Side of Manhattan a child and parent center (w-hich w-e call simply the Bank Street Early Childhood Center because that is the name selected by the families who are working with us to develop this center as a resource for themselves and their neighbors). In the Center w-e are trying to carry out to its fullest the brOa(I conceptualization of Head Start. The families in the Center are representative of the poorest and the most isolated of families which we have ever known, and yet families with very great potential for self help. Since 1943 the College has had a close w-orking relationship with the Public School System of New York and for all these years we have sent faculty teams into schools to work with teachers and supervisors on problems of their own choosing. The most recent and perhaps dramatic of these cooperative efforts is the Bank Street Educational Resources Center. located in the heart of Harlem, PAGENO="0308" 1130 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS which has been serving as a resource to three District Superintendents. Long before there was the wide-spread concern about the schools of the ghetto areas of the big city, Bank Street was deeply engaged in studying and probing at this great problem. Finally, I should perhaps add, the College has in the past six years conducted training programs and provided consultation to a number of cities across the na- tion, thus giving us a picture of the educational scene beyond New York City. For the Office of Equal Educational Opportunities of the U.S. Office of Education we have been providing consultation service to school systems facing particular curriculum problems as part of their efforts to desegregate and integrate their schools. We have provided training for teams of teachers and administrators from such cities as El Paso, St. Louis, LouisviUe, Boston, Washington, D.C., San Juan, Milwaukee, Charlotte, and Cleveland. This coming summer, teams of teachers from Louisville. Atlanta, Hartford, Miami, and Cleveland will be study- ing at Bank Street directly on the problems faced by their school systems in re- lation to the education of disadvantaged children. ~`rom this wide-spread involvement we can report to you, ladies and gentle- men, that, although the educational problems of this nation are vast and will re- quire an expanding effort on the part of the federal goveimment and the states for correction, there is abroad in the land today an encouraging movement on the part of not just schools and educators but of the related professions and the general citizenry which promises great hope. We are convinced that the school is the most critically important agency in our society for cutting into the per- inanent cycle of poverty. Many other things need to be done, of course, but un- less we can provide the boys and girls who are now coming out of our schools doomed to permanent unemployability the skills and attitudes necessary for play- ing productive roles in society, the culture of poverty will continue and only grow worse. My first point relative to legislation to strengthen elementary and secondary education in the country is to commend this Committee and the Congress upon the important first steps which have been taken and to urge that in all future legislation the vast proportions and complexity of the problem be borne in mind. School systems, just like other social systems, do not change easily. The prob- 1cm of the re-training of large numbers of personnel is gigantic in proportion and slow in accomplishment. New methods and new- materials for teaching the children from highly disorganized families must be developed. New resources must be found to meet the medical and psychological needs of children. There- fore, if we. the American people, intend to do the job, we will have to put into it many times the resources which we have been willing to make available to date. My first point, then, is to urge the Gongress to provide increasing funds in support of the various programs which can, given enough time and money. bring about the necessary and desirable changes in our entire approach to the education of children and youth. Secondly I should like to make some brief observations on the proposed Amendment to Title V of the Elementary and Secondary Act relating to grants for comprehensive educational planning. Because, if solving our educational problem requires a great deal more money, it also requires a great deal more systematic, coordinated planning and evaluation of education at all levels. We strongly support the proposal in Section 523 (a) (1) of this bill for the establishment of a single state agency to develop comprehensive state-wide planning programs designed to 1) set state-wide educational goals: 2) develop through analysis alternative methods of achieving these goals: and 3) plan new programs and improvement of existing programs based on the results of these analyses. We also urge that there he included among the new programs to he considered by such state-wide planning agencies a program for "New Careers in Education"- that is to say. the coordination of non-professionals along with professionals in a long-range, integrated approach to meeting the learning needs of children and youth. Bank Street College of Education is currently conducting, under a contract with the Office of Economic Opportunity. a nation-wide Study of Auxiliary Personnel (that is non-professionals) in Education. The first report of this Study is the volume entitled "Teacher Education in a Social Context." several copies of which I shall leave with the Committee staff. Preliminary findings from the analyses of 15 demonstration training programs for auxiliary school PAGENO="0309" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1131 personnel reveal that such personnel demonstrate a capacity to make a positive contribution to the learning-teaching process. when the following conditions prevail: 1. When the roles for aides are developed in terms of the particular strengths of each aide and the particular needs of the pupils of l)artidular classrooms, rather than the roles being defined in rigid categories which are supposed to apply to all situations. 2. When intensive and continuing training is provided, both for the non- professionals and for the professionals with whom they work. 3. When the job of the auxiliary personnel is incorporated in the entire school structure as a new and respected career, and not merely as a temporary ex- pedient. 4. When the school and the school system look upon all members of staff, from the building custodian to the top superintendent, as being part of an educational team which is constantly influencing the lives of the young. These essential components in the productive utilization of auxiliary school personnel are often lacking, almost always because there has been no compre- hensive planning. The attitude so often is: "We certainly could use an extra pair of hands and somebody else is paying the bill, so let's get ourselves some aides." `Whether this is precisely the attitude or not, we can say that the wide- spread employnient of non-professionals without adequate arientiation or train- ing has often proved deleterious to the total program and has nullified its po- tential values. State-wide planning agencies to clarify and confirm educational goals, such as providing education which is relevant to the needs of individual children, w'oiild. we believe, contribute significantly to establishing the conditions ~vhicli we believe are essential if the important program of using auxiliary s~hool per- sonnel is to make the important contribution which it can make. State-wide planning agencies w'ould be in a positiou to analyze the way in which the intro- duction of non-professionals into the classroom can help implement the goal of individualized instruction, and then develop innovative prngi'aiiis for the train- ing and institutionalization of auxiliary personnel in school systeiiis throughout each state in the nation. Therefore, ladies ai~cl gentlemen, we want to give special enclorseuient to this particular section of the proposed legislation. ATTXILIARY SChOOL PERSONNEL: ThEIR Ror,Es. Tn,~INING, AND INSTITTTIONATTzAT ION BqNrcl on a nationwide stud,, of teach cr-a ulos, teach er-q.ssi.stos ts. font ilil urorh"rs. and other aurilia,'y person aol in cilura liOn (By Garda W. Bow-man and Gordon .T. Klopf The employment of teacher-aides, teaelier-:issistants, guidance-aides, health- aides, family w'orkers and other auxiliary personnel iii schools iio'reasecl sharply during the mid-sixties. Often however, the circumstances under whioh funds could he secured as well as the urgency of the need required a crash program. The essential component of preparation was therefore lacking-preparation not only of the nonprofessionals themselves but even more importantly, of the teach- ers and other professionals with whom t1ue~i would he working. Several convergent forces-social, educational and economic-have contributed to the mushrooming of such employment at a i~ace w'hich sometimes pi'ecludecl adeonate orientation: 1. The ever changing and expanding needs for school services: 2. Acute shortages of professionals to meet these needs: 3. New dimensions in education, requiring a more complex and demanding role for teachers; 4. Heightened aw-areness of the special learning needs of disadvantaged chil- dren and youth: 5. Recognition of the communication blocks which often exist between middle class professionals and lower class pupils; 6. The plight of undereducated persons unable to compete in an increasingly automated economy; PAGENO="0310" 1132 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 7. The availability of Federal funds for the employment of low income non- professionals in education. through such sources as O.E.O., M.D.T.A., and Title I of the E.S.E.A. The Office of Economic Opportunity, alert to this critical situation, requested Bank Street College of Education to conduct a study of auxiliary personnel in ed- ucation. This study, exploratory and developmental in nature. has three specific areas of inquiry: role development, training, and institutionalization of auxil- iaries in school systems. One component of the study was the coordination and analysis of 13 demonstration training programs, 11 of which were conducted during the summer of 1966. The other four started in the fall of 1966. In these programs professionals and nonprofessionals studied and worked together to in- crease the effectiveness of auxiliary personnel in various school situations. The auxiliaries learned specific skills and gained some basic understandings needed to operate in a school setting. The teacher-trainees learned in a reality situation-a practicum-how to utilize and relate to other adults in a classroom. The auxiliary trainees in the Summer Institutes included Navaho Indians from a reservation; low income whites from Appalachia; Mexican-Americans, Ne- groes and others in California; predominantly Negroes in Gary, md., in Jack- son. Mississippi, and in Detroit: mothers receiving aid to dependent children in Maine; Puerto Ricans, Negroes and others in East Harlem; Puerto Ricans in disadvantaged sections of Metropolitan San Juan; and a cross-cultural, cross- class group of trainees in Boston. The varied experiences of the demonstration programs will be described and analyzed in some depth in the final report of the study which is due early in 1967. Meantime, this brochure considers what seems to help or harm effective utilization of auxiliary personnel in education. It offers: (1) rationale for the use of auxiliaries in school systems: (2) some difficulties which might be en- countered: and (3) some recommendations for coping with these difficulties, based on the experience thus far in the demonstration training programs. It is expected that the demonstration programs may have some relevance to other school situations where auxiliary personnel are employed or are about to he employed. Further this report may elicit comments and countersuggestions which u-ill contribute to the exploration of a new and promising development in education. RATIONALE FOR TIlE TTILIZATION OF ALXILIARY PERSONNEL IN SCHOOL SYSTEMS Tile question is often asked: "Should the school system be required to solve all the social proldenls of our time ." This leads to a second question : `Is the utilization of low incoflie workers as auxiliary school personnel aimed primarily at creating jobs for the poor. at coping with acute manpower shortage, or at help- ing to meet the needs of pupils?" To those who coTl(luete(l demonstration training programs during the summer of itHd the answer appeared to be that tile essential criterion of any innovation in edueat~on is whether it helps to meet the learning and developmental needs of chii(lren and youth. However, they heiieved that the learning-teaching process can he truly effective only in relation to the totality of the child's experi- ence. The school, like every other institution, operates within a social context, not in isolation. The sponsors of the demonstration programs believed that even if there were no shortage (if teachers, the introduction of more adults into tile classroom would enhance tile quality of education-adults selected on the basis of their concern for children and their potential as supportive personnel rather than primarily on the basis of previous training. They saw, too, great Possibilities in tile profes- siommai-nonimrofessiomia I team in enal )l I ng the teacher to differentiate tile learning- teaching process to meet tile individual needs of pupils, as diagnosed by the teacher. They saw, too, in this multi-level team approach escape from rigid structuring in tile classroom-for example, more freedom of movement, more small groupings, more independent activities than would be feasible for one person often operating under difficult teaching conditions. In fact, tile teacher might, with this assistance, be able to experiment with innovative techniques which he had long been wanting to inaugurate. These values are universal-that is to say, they migilt be realized through the effective utilization of auxiliaries in any classroom regardless of the comnposi- PAGENO="0311" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1133 tion of the school population or the socio-econoniie background of the auxiliaries. In summary, the multiple benefits which were perceived as possible in all school situations were- 1. To the pupil, by providing more individualized attention by concerned adults, more mobility in the classroom, and more opportunity for innovation 2. To the tca c/icr, by rendering his role more satisfying in terms of status and more manageable in terms of teaching conditions; 3. To the other professionals, by increasing the scope and effectiveness of their activities; 4. To the auxiliar,i, by providing meaningful employment which con- tributes at one and the same time to his own development and to the needs of society; 5. To the school administrator, by providing some answers to his dilemma of ever increasing needs for school services, coupled with shortage of pro- fessionals to meet these needs-a solution, not the solution, and certainly not a panacea; 6. To faniil,~ life, by giving auxiliaries, many of whom are or may some- day become parents, the opportunity to learn child development principles in a reality situation; 7. To the community at large, by providing a means through which un- employed and educationally disadvantaged persons may enter the main- stream of productivity. In addition to these global considerations, there are some specific benefits which may flow from the utilization of indigenous personnel as auxiliaries in schools serving disadvantaged neighborhoods. The auxiliary who has actually lived in disadvantaged environments often speaks to the disadvantaged child or youth in a way that is neither strange nor threatening. He may help the new pupil to a(1just to the unfamiliar world of the school without undue defensiveness : to fill the gaps, if aimy, in his preparation for learning; and to build upon his strengths, which may have more relevance to the new situation than the child, himself, realizes. This cultural bridge is seen as an asset, in and of itself, even if there were no need to provide jobs for the poor. Moreover, the low-income auxiliary, having faced up to and overcome some of the difficulties and frustrations the children now face, may serve to motivate the child to further effort. his very presence iii a role of some status in the school says to the child: "It can be done: it is worth trying to do; you, too, can succeed here." This has far more meaning than the story of a Ralph Bunche or a Felisa Rincon de Gautier to one who obviously lacks the exceptional ability of these great hut remote persons. Naturally, this message would he imparted more forcefully if the faculty, too, were mixed in terms of socio-economnic l)ackgroumld. As work-study programs become increasingly available, economic integration may bec'onie more frequent in school faculties. Meantime, the low-income auxili:i ry sometimes provides in- centive to poor pupils which would otherwise be lacking. Further, the auxiliary from the child's own neighborhood may be able to interpret to the middle class professional some aspects of the behavior of a child who is non-responding in a school situation. The auxiliary may, in turn, interpret the goals of the school and the learning-teaching process to both parent and child. To reach the child for a few hours a day without reaching those who influence his mode of living may he of little avail, The parent who doesn't understand a school official sometimes finds a neighbor serving as a school auxiliary helpful. However, the fact that low-income auxiliaries may and often do facilitate communication between school and community does not mean that all poor people can work effectively with poor pupils and their families. Naturally, any candidate for school employment should he carefully screened for those personal characteristics needed to w-ork w-ith children and youth. How-ever, the demon- stration programs have revealed that a flexible amid imaginative selection process may discover in poor people potential that has been overlooked thus far- potential which may be developed as an asset in a school setting. In summary, new dimensions in education call for the utilization of school personnel of various socio-economic backgrounds and at various levels of training working together as teams to meet the w-ide range of pupil needs in changing communities, Since economic, social and educational problems often have some PAGENO="0312" 1134 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS common causal factors, a single solution may have multiple values. It may result in positive pupil outcomes aiid iii socially useful outcomes as well. The utilization of low-income auxiliaries in disadvantaged areas appears to be a case in point. Its possibilities are many. Its real significance is only beginning to be explored. The study is designed to view these possibilities in terms of several reality situations, and to identify factors which seem to block or facilitate the realiza- tion of educational values from the utilization of auxiliaries in these specific sitUO tions. T)IFFICULTIES wHICh MIGhT ARISE IN THE DEPLOYMENT OF AUXILIARIES IN SCHOOLS During the pre-planning for the overall study and for the demonstration pro- grams. many professional and administrative concerns were discussed. Some of the anticipated difficulties w-ere actually encountered. Others proved to be mere conjecture. not substantiated by experience. The fact that these possible problems had been Coflsi(1e1'ed in advance aided in their solution. The difficulties anticipated by each of the groups involved in the training pro- grams differed widely. For school administrators they w-ere largely "how to" problems, such as establishing fiscal policies-the whole process of setting up a new hierarchy of positions, with job descriptions, job titles, salaries, increments. i'ole prerogatives. and training requirements for advancement. Another ``how to'' problem for the superintendent was orienting the principals, who, in turn were faced with the problem f interpreting the new- program to the teachers and (tiler professionals so that they would utilize rather than ignore, reject, or resent their would-he holpers. Theirs was the task to determine w-ho would conduct the training of 1)0th professionals and nonprofessionals and how to secure such personnel. Often all this had to be accomplished w-ithin and in spite of institutional rigidities. Moreover, the school administrator was responsi- ble for involving local institutions of higher learning and the indigenous leader- ship in the planning, and for interpreting the new program to the Board and to broader community. The professionals--teachers. supervisors, guidance counselors. et al-were Irimarily concerned that professional standards should be maintained. They wondered whether the auxiliaries might try to "take over," but they were even more concerned lest the administrators, caught in the bind between increasing enrollment and decreasing availability of professional personnel. might assign functions to the auxiliaries that were essentially professional in nature. The teachers. specifically. believed that teacher-aides might sometimes be assigned to a class without tile supervision of a certified professional. Teachers, par- ticularly. questioned w-hether funds which might have been used to reduce the teaching load would be used instead to employ auxiliaries, while increasing rather than (lecreasing the size of classes. Some teachers and other professionals also doubted that adequate time w'ould be set aside during school hours for planni?g nnd evaluating with the auxiliaries assirned to them. Moreover, many professionals were not accustomed to the new leadership function which they were being asked to perform. Some felt threatened by another adult in the classroom. Others could not envision ways iii which to use this new source of assistance effectively. Still others nnticipated that the auxiliaries might not speak in standard English and hence might under- mine their ow-n efforts to improve the pupils' language skills. A few- w-oridered whether the pupils would respond more easily to the auxiliaries than to them- selves and that they might therefore lose close, personal contacts with their pu~ uls. The auxiliaries, themselves, had many trepidations. They. too, appeared to ic concerned about the differences in their background, values, and patterns of speech from those prevailing in the school. While the professionals often con- sidered the effects of such factors upon pupils, the auxiliaries tended to become defensive and uncomfortable because of these differences. On the other hand, some auxiliaries were resentful, pai'ticularly in pre-school centers. w-hen they observed only the end result of the planning-i.e.. w-hat was actually done for pupils and by whom in the classroom. Not understanding the diagnostic skills i'equired of the teacher in designing the program to meet the needs of individual pupils, these auxiliaries were heard to say : `~\Ve do the same things as the teacher: w-hy should they be paid more?" PAGENO="0313" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDITCATION AMENDMENTS 1133 It became evident that the problem of defining and redefining one's own role was only one aspect of the challenge. An even more important task was defining. understanding and accepting the role of the person with whom one was to work. This was equally true of profssionals and auxiliaries as they entered into a new, sensitive and complex relationship. In fact, one of the insights gained from the demonstration ~)rograms was that many of the doubts and con- cerns could have been avoided if there had been adequate specification of roles an(I functions prior to the operation. In those programs where these possible difficulties were discussed by school administrators, university representatives and conimunity leaders in pre-planning sessions, the problems were either ameliorated or prevented. Usually, only the unexpected proves disastrous. PR~IMINARY RECOMMENDATION S In essence, the experiences in the 11 demonstration programs which were operating during the summer of 1906 seemed to indicate that it is not likely that the desired outcomes from the utilization of auxiliary personnel in a given school situation would he realized unless certain pre-conditions to their use were established, so as to avoid or resolve some of the difficulties listed in the preceding section. Specific recommendations are presented below, based on the experiences, thus far. in role development and training demonstrations. The recommendations refer to all types of auxiliaries, not merely to those from low-income groups. 1. Rote defluition and development That role specifications and prerogatives of auxiliaries be clearly defined. in order to prevent either their underutilization by unconvinced professionals. or their ererutilization by harried administrators faced by manpower shortages. That the functions of individual auxiliaries and of the professionals with whom they work be developed reciprocally in terms of the dynamics of each specific situation. That role definition. w-hich gives security, be balanced with role development. which gives variety and scope to the program. That the w-hole range of teaching functions be re-examined, so as to identify those which might be performed by nonprofessionals such as monitorEd, escort- ing. technical, clerical, and the more important functions directly related to instruction and to home-school relations. That teaching functions he further examined to identify the more complex and highly professional functions w-hich should be performed by a teacher alone, such as diagnosis of the learning needs of puidls. planning programs to meet these needs, and orchestrating other adults in the classroom in the execution of such programs. 2. Training a) Preser rice That there be preservice training of auxiliaries to develop coimmmnunication skills and other concrete skills as well as the basic understandings needed for success during their first work experience, thus bolstering self confidence and encouraging further effort. That the training be differentiated to meet the special needs and characteris- tics of each group. considering such variables as the age of the trainees and the levels (elenientary, niiddle or secondary) at which they are being trained to work. That there be orientation of both the administrators and the professionals with whom the auxiliaries will be working. including an opportunity for the expi~es- sion of any doubts or fears which may exist, and t'or c nsideratioii of the new and challenging leadership role of the professionals vis-a-vis the nonprofes- sionals. That institutes for administrators, teachers and auxiliaries be conducted, where a sound approach to collaborative education can he developed. That a iracticum l)e included in all preservice trailiing-ie a field teaching experience where professionals and nonprofessionals try out and evaluate their team approach. ufl(ler the close supervision of the training staff. That training of trainers and supervisors be provided. PAGENO="0314" 1136 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS b) In-scrrice That there be a comprehensive, continuing, in-depth program of development and supervision of auxiliaries closely integrated with a long term program of stable, open-ended employment, so that each level of work responsibility will have comparable training available. That mechanisms for process observations and feed-back be developed with a spirit of openness to suggestion so that dynamic role concepts and relationships may emerge which are relevant to each specific situation. c) Hiylicr education (on work-study basis) That the cooperation of 2-year and community colleges be sought in the devel- opment of programs for auxiliaries who would move into roles requiring more knowledge and skills than at the entry level: for example, library-aides might have one or two years' training in the librarian's role. That the cooperation of colleges of teacher education and departments of edu- cation in institutions of higher learning be sought in two respects. first by pro- viding educational opportunities for auxiliaries who desire to qualify for ad- vancenient to the professional level, and second by incorporating into their cur- ricula the expanded role concept of the teacher in collaborative education. Since the demonstration programs conducted during the summer of 1966 were primarily for the purposes of role development and training, the third focus of the study-institutionalization--was not a component of these demonstrations except in the programs conducted by school systems: Detroit, Puerto Rico, and Gary. Indiana. however, in every training program, the need for institutionali- zation w-as stressed by staff and participants alike. They believed that the antic- ipatel benefits had been realized in their training experience, but they also be- lieved that training for jobs that were not stable or at best dead-end would be frustrating to tho participants. The following recommendations on institutional- ization are, in effect, a look into the future rather than a look backwards at the Summer Institutes. They represent the needed developments, as perceived by innovators in this field, for the optimum effectiveness of auxiliary personnel in Aiiierican education. S. Institutionalization That when and if a school system decides to utilize auxiliary personnel, the program be incorporated as an integral part of the school system, not treated as an extraneous adjunct to the system. That goals he thought through carefully, stated clearly, and implemented by means of definite procedures. That there be cooperative planning by the school systems, local institutions of higher learning and the indigenous leadership of the community served by the schools. both before the program has been inaugi~rated and after it has bcen institutionalized. That each stop n the career ladder he specified in terms of functions. salaries, in'reinents and rio prerogatives, nioving from routine functions at the entry level to functi ns which are more responsible and more directly related to the learning-teaching process. That professional standards he preserved and that all tasks performed by teacher-aides he supervised by a teacher. `!`hat encouragenient of those who desire to train and qualify for advance- ment he expressed in such a way that others who lirefer to remain at the entry level feel no lack of job satisfaction, status. and recognition of the worth of their services-in other words. that there should be opportunity but not corn- pofsion for upward mobility. That time he scheduled during the school day or after school hours with extra compensation' for teachers and auxiliaries and other professional-non- professional teams to evaluate their experiences and plan together for the coming day. That the quantity and quality of supervision he re-examined in the light of the needs of this program. That the personal needs and concerns of both professionals and auxiliaries be dealt with in counseling sessions as they adjust to a new and sometimes threat- ening situatioa. `This arrangement w-onld vary according to the pattern established In each school system. PAGENO="0315" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDIJCATION AMENDMENTS 1137 That parents be involved in the program both as auxiliaries and as recipients of the services of family workers. That. contacts be established with professional groups. That a continuing program of interpretation among educators and to the broader community be developed, with emphasis upon feed-back as well as iinpartiiig information. That an advisory committee of school administrators, supervisors, teachers, auxiliaries, parents, community leaders and university consultants be established to evaluate and iniprove the utilization of auxiliaries in each school where such a prorgam is undertaken. Mr. BEu~. I would like to introduce Dr. Willenberg. Mr. WILLENBERG. Thank you for the introduction, Mr. Chairman. Would it be the desire of the chairman that I summarize and ask that the statement be placed in the record? Chairman PERKiNs. Without. obj ection, we will insert your pre- pared statement in the. record at this point. (The. statement referred to follows:) STATEMENT OF ERNEST P. WILLENBERG. PRESIDENT, THE COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN, YEA Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: The Council for Exceptional Children is grateful to the House Committee on Education and Labor for the gains in the education of handicapped and gifted children which have accrued through the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 and the amend- ments to this act of 1966. We are very l)leased to present our reactions to the Elementary and Secondary Amendments of 1967. We believe that there has been no act of greater significance in improving American education thaii the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. Furthermore, we have noted that the amendments of 1966 were necessary ones to extend and improve the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. We also are ~fl full agreement w-ith HR. 6230, The Elementary and Secondary Amendments of 1967. At this point, we would also like to commend the 1-lonorable Hugh Carey and the nienibers of tile Ad Hoc Subcommittee on the Haiidicapped during the 89th Conrress. We believe that tile able work of Mr. Carey and his committee (lid much to clarify tile iieeds for handicapped children aiid the issues related thereto. \Vheii Mr. ( `arey. jOilie(l by the full Committee (01 Edue~~tioii and Labor, helped to secure Title VI through the Elementary and S((~ iidary Education AIne~idments of 1966., the basis for sound and continued ~rog'm'ess in the educa- tion of exceptional children was firmly established. `We are particularly pleased that the ainendineiits tills year add to tile substan- tial base already created. Recognizing that tile committee will bear much testi- iiioiiy on other phases of the Admniiiistriitioii proposals, we will confine our testi- inoity to those which have reference to ameiicling Title VI. We are sure tile corn- inittee is aware that the programs envisioned under the amneiidments to `IPitle VI were thoroughly discussed in the Ad Hoc' Subcommittee on the Handicapped last year and that a substantial record has already been built with regard to these cru('ial needs. Our statements regarding these new provisicns are as follows "1. The new Section 608. providing for Regional Resources Centers, would en- able services and improvements in tile education of handicapped c'hildren which are greatly needed. We have Iloted that institutions of higher education, state ethic'atioiial agencies. or combinations of such agencies or il1stitutions within par- ti('ular regions (If the Fnited States. are authorized to estailhisil such centers. `We would urge that a `collil(inatitin' feature be emphasized. if not required. Greater cooperation between stilte educational fI~'(1i('i~S and iiistitutioiis of higher education would he fostered by the joint operation of a regional type of center. Furtllermore. since these Regional Resource Centers would undoubtedly become resources in higher education, it w-ould i)e logical for these ceilters to be (leveloped with the cooperation of regional agencies in hligher education. such as the South- ern Regional Education Board. `Western Interstate Commission on higher Edu- cation, and the New- England Board on Higher Education. These agencies are uniquely staffed and equipped to encourage the type of regional action which is PAGENO="0316" 1138 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS intended by this provision. We also want to emphasize that two great needs would be met through these centers. These needs are as follows: "a. A place would he provided for the educational appraisal of children pre- senting very difficult problems. For example, a deaf-blind child is difficult to assess adequately. Being deprived of both visual and auditory senses, this child is unable to respond to stimuli ordinarily `associated with those senses. Deter- mining differential elements in this child's diagnosis is a problem requiring the most astute and knowledgeable medical, psychological, audiological, educational, and other personnel available. There are also other children who present mul- tiple physical, sensory, and learning disabilities and who require extensive and careful appraisal. "b. Furthermore. the Regional Resource Centers would be authorized to help develop additional programs to meet these needs and to assist appropriate schools and organizations through consultation, periodic reexamination, reevaluation, and other technical services. The worth of thi,s Regional Resource Center as- sumes even greater proportions when one realizes that the numbers in some categories of multiply handicapped children are so small that even regional and national resources for educational training might be required. We feel certain that these Regional Resource Centers, when established, will become fountain- heads of innovation in terms of developing understanding of, and programs for. the handicapped. "2. As the Chairman of the Committee indicated in introducing the Admin- istration proposals in the House of Representatives, the best current estimates are that 300.000 teachers of handicapped children are needed and that only ap- proximately 70,000 are currently employed. We join with the Chairman in point- ing out the necessity for recruiting the professional personnel needed to assume the task of providing the education these children need. We are fully aware of the competition which already exists, and which may become even greater, for the product of our institutions of higher education. We believe that careers in edu- cating the handicapped must he presented as favorably as possible if w-e are to secure the teachers we need. "The Council for Exceptional Children is pleased to report to this committee that we and some of our state units are already at work in this field. Tue Illi- nois Council for Exceptional Children has demonstrated that a state organization can have great impact by conducting a concerted recruiting c'anipaign. In cooperation with the State Department of Education and the colleges and uni- versities who train educational personnel for exceptional children in Illinois. the Illinois Council for Exceptional Children has conducted career days and other efforts which have brought major numbers of recruits into Illinois colleges. It is interesting to note that. currently, in 17 colleges with such training programs in Illinois, 3572 students are enrolled with majors in the field of special educa- tion. Similar efforts are underway or are being planned by CEC units in other states. "The Council for Exceptional Children has a Committee on Recruitment which is currently developing a career brochure which we hope to have printed in time for use by high school counselors next fall. These brochures will also l)e avail- able to our state units and to others who request them. Furthermore, the CEC Committee on Recruitment is considering other ways i11 which the associatioii may become active in this field. "Many colleges and universities conduct their own recruitment campaigns. We believe that the financial assistance in HR. 0230 for recruiting personnel would provide greater substance to the efforts now underway. We hope that the scope of this provision might include short-term stipends for students to work in summer settings ft-aS the handicapped, such as schools. ~`auips. and recreation ~)m'ograms. so that a brief experience would lie available to assist the student toward a career decision. "We also hope that information of all kinds, as indicated in the bill, could he clissenminatecl thrnu~h liroehiires. career films. ra(lio and television spot announce- ments. and progra mus especially designed foi' educational television stations as well as for public service time eu u)nmmer('ial television stations. In short. we hope that all possilile media a i~d nietliods which imuight have an impact on the recruitment of students would he possible through this legislation. "3. We are fully in accord with the extension of the provisions of Title VI of the Elementary amid Secondary Education Act of 1P65 to schools for Indian children and ti the Defense Department overseas dependent schools. We have PAGENO="0317" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATIOX AMENDMENTS 1139 had significant correspondence from school 1)e1'~OnneI iii military imistallations imidicating such imeeds. The committee might be interested in kno~ving that a number of CEC members are specifially engaged in educational work in Indian schools. We have had occasion to discuss briefly the mieods of handicapped children in the Indian schools with personnel from the Bureau of Indian Affairs and feel certain that in appropriate agencies of the government there is sonie awareness of these needs. Here, again, we commend the committee for its obvious determination to be sure that the full benefits of time Elementary and Secondary Education Act extend to every American child. "4. We warmly endorse the proposed expansion of the Captioned Films for the 1)eaf program to include all handicapped persons. The Captioned Filimis for the Deaf program started first through private resources, but became a Federal program when it became obvious that the needs in this field were so great that the Government had to become responsible for support. We believe that this program has already brought educational benefits to thousands of children in schools as well as to the adult deaf. "In 1965 this act was broadened to make provision for `research in the use of education and training films and other educational media for the deaf, for the production and distribution of educational amid training films and other edu- cational media for the deaf and the training of persons in the use of such films and media.' Here we have a practical demonstration of how a program has served one of the areas of the handicapped. It seems fairly obvious that if simi- lar advantages were offered the blind, the mentally retarded, the neurologically impaired, and others through the design and production of specialized edu- cational media, great advantages would accrue. We would emphasize that, from the beginning, the program for the deaf should be protected at a level of per- formance consistent with its present status and reasonable future expansion. We would assume that an authorized $1 million, if appropriated, would be- come available for laying the foundation for developments in fields of exceptional children other than the deaf. In time, due attention would need to be given for appropriations adequate for a reasonable growth of these new programjs. We believe that current and future technological advances, as well as knowledge about the instruction of children, can be applied in an imaginative way through a program of this type. We are sure that, provided this opportunity, educators of the handicapped will combine their ingenuity with the knowledge of technical consultants to produce instructional media and materials which will greatly im- prove the efficiency of personnel instructing handicapped children." Inclosing, Mr. Chairman, we would like to assure the committee of the desire of The Council for Exceptional Children to be of further assistance as you may need us. We also pledge ourselves to continue our efforts to assist in mobilizing the field of special education to undertake the great and important tasks that lie before us. STATEMENT OF ERNI~ST P. WILLEITBERG, PRESIDENT, COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN, NEA, ACCOMPANIED BY WILLIAM C. GEER, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY Mr. WILLENBERG. I am the president of the council for exceptional children and the director of special education for the Los Aittieles City Schools. We appear before you today-Mr. Geer. who is the executive secre- tary of the Council for Exceptional Children, a clepartinent~ of the Na- tional Educational Association- Chairman PERKINS. We are. glad to welcome you here. Dr. WTillen- berg. and I want to concur in the statement made by my colheague from California, Mr. Bell. Mr. `WILLENBERG. To speak on behalf of the amendments that have been suggested with reference to title 6 of the Elenmiitary and Second- ar\- Education Acts, we are in hearty agreement with the amend- ments proposed t.o title 6. PAGENO="0318" 1140 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTJCATION AMENDMENTS I might detail these by referring to the new section 608 providing for the regional resource centers and support the concept of these regional resource centers by also suggesting that if these centers are approved and funded to the extent indicated that it would seem we]l that the centers be operated in conjunction with institutions of higher learning and, also, possibly in conjunction with the regional education board. In those instances in which the educational board and institutions of higher learning would not be the appropriate administrative organi- zations. certainly State departments of education would have the pre- rogative and should be encouraged to exercise its leadership role in seing that regional resource centers are able to function according to the intent of the proposed legislation. (1ertainlv. there is need for a better appraisal of the educational potentialities of exceptional children. This constitutes a serious prob- lem throughout the. Nation and we look forward to the time that these regional resource centers will be available so that more. children who require special services because of handicapping conditions will have the opportunity of being identical. In addition to that service, of education of children with snecial needs, the resource centers woul(l he authorized to help develop addi- tional programs to meet these~ nee(ls and to assist appropriate schools and organizations through consultation periodic reexamination, re- evaluation, and other types of technical services. As the chairman of the committee in(iicated in introducing the administration proposals in the louse of Representatives, the best current estimates are that there are 3~),()00 teachers of handicapped children needed. but that we have at present only approximately 10,000 currently employed. \Ve are fully aware of the significance and importance of a nationwide recruiting campaign that would call to the attention of those who are potential teachers and workers with exceptional children, the ol)portuflity that exists in working with this segment of the school population. Th council for exceptional children is Pleased to report that it has a committee already at work and has an exemplary program already in existence for the recruitment of teachers for handicapped children in Illinois where through the Illinois federation of the council for exceptional children that council has developed a statewide plan to interest prospective candidates to enter the. teacher prepai~ition 1)1o- grams: 3.512 students, as a matter of fact, are enrolled with majors in special education in that State and we point to that as an example of what can be accomplished with some enthusiasm that would be encouraged on a nationwide basis through legislation. ~\Ve are~ fully in accord, also, with the extension of the provision of title 6 of the Elementary and ~ecoiidarv Education Act of l96~ to schools for Indian children and to the Defense. Department overseas- (lei)endent schools. WTe warmly endorse the I)1'oPosed expansion of the~ caption film progi~ins for the deaf to include all handicapped persons. \Ve autioii iii our endorsenient of this aspect of the amend- ments that the current program for captioned films not be reduced that in the expansion of the prl)gralfl that the current~ program for PAGENO="0319" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1141 the deaf be continued; that the expansion occur with the. augmenta- tion of similar programs for other programs of handicapped children. In closing, Mr. Chairman, we would like to assure the. committee of the desire of the council for exceptional children to he of further assist- ance as you may need us. WTe. also pledge. ourselves to continue, our efforts to assist in mobilizing the field of special education to under- take the great and important tasks that lie before us. Thank you. Chairman Prni~ixs. Thank you very much. You have made an excellent statement and I agree it ~s time for us to get busy and do a better job in the training field for teachers. In connection with the comniittee's consideration of the adminis- trations recommendations with respect. to title \I ~)I0Viding special educational programs for handicapped children. I want the record to show reference to the heaiin~s conducted by the Ad Hoc ~iTbCOluhiiittee on the Handicapped during the 89th Congress. The coniniendable. leadership provided by our colleague. in cl lain ng those hearings has added much to the knowledge of the comniittee respecting the needs of this group of clisad va.ntaged children. Program. improvements being recommended in H.R. 6230 with respect to title VI are attribu- table in large i'i~1~ to the fine work done by Mr. Carey and his sub- committee during the last session. Education and Training of the Handicapped, Hearings before the Ad Hoc Sub- committee on the Handicapped of the Committee on Education and Labor. House of Representatives, 89th Congress, Second Session, on Investigation of the Ade- quacy of Federal and Other Resources for Education and Training of the Handi- capped. parts 1. 2, and 3. on June 6. S. 9. 14. 15. 20, 21. and 22. 1966 : August 9, 16. 17. 18. 22, 24; October 5. 1966. and December 19 and 20. 1966. Chairman Prin~ixs. Would the next. witness identify himself for the record? Dr. GEER. Dr. Gee.r. I collaborated on the statement just read by Mr. Willenherg and if I can l)e of any assistance in answering questions. I will be happy to (10 50. Chairman PERKINS. We will recess at this time and reconvene at about 1 :15 p.m. W~e will let the other witnesses make. their statements and then all of the witnesses will assemble for questioning. Mr. BRADEMAS. If it would be in order, Mr. Chairman, I would like, to make a unanimous-consent. request. I request. that. following reference to it. in my colloquy with tIle witnesses from Minnesota there be included an article, from the Minneapolis Star dated March 3, 1967. I would also like to ask unanimous consent that following my col- loquv with Dr. Edgar Fuller of March 6, 1967, there be included a letter from Nolan Estes of the Office, of Education relevant, to our discussion at that point. Chaiiniaui PERKINS. Is there objection? The Chair hears none. It is so ordered. We will recess until 1 :15. (Whereupon, at. 12 :15 p.m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at 1 :15 p.m. of the same day.) PAGENO="0320" 1142 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS AFTKR RECESS (The committee reconvened at 1 :15 p.m., Representative Carl D. Perkins presiding.) Chairman PERKINS. The committee will come to order. We have with us Monsignor Donohue, the director of the depart- ment of education, National Catholic Welfare Conference here in Washington. M~iti. William McManus. and Mr. John Cicco, deputy superintendent of the diocese, of the schools of Pittsburgh. First. I promised this morning Congressman Quie could introduce briefly Dr. Austin D. Swanson, associate professor of education, State University of New York, N.Y. Before we get started, let me ask do we have any other witnesses in the hearing room who have not been called upon for a statement? If so. hold your hands up. We overlooked a witness here the other av and I hope we don't (TO it again. Mr. Q~iE. I would like to introduce Dr. Swanson. Congressman Goodell aske(l me to do it. and also aske(l I)r. Swanson to come down from New York. Mr. Goodell has been away because his campaign maiuiuer passed away and the funeral is today. If it had not been for that, he would have been here to introduce T)r. Swanson. I will make you an honorary Minnesot ian for today. Chairman PERKINS. On behalf of Congressman Goodell and Con- gressman Quie, welcome. For all of the members of the committee, we are delighted that you came down to make a statement. As you know. Congressman Goodell has been very active in the writing of legislation. STATEMENT OF AUSTIN D. SWANSON, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF EDUCATION, STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BUFFALO Dr. SWANSON. Thank you Mr. Chairman and member of the com- mittee. With the name Swanson I think I qualify for citizenship in the State of Minnesota. Perhaps I should identify myself a little bit further. I am an as- soci ate professor of education at the State University of New York at Buffalo. My academic area of specialty is that of public school finance. As most professors, I also have other responsibilities. One is executive Secretary of the Western New York School Study Council and another responsibility which should be of particular interest to this committee is that I am a project director for a planning grant of one of your t itle 3 supplementary educational centers. With that I would like to say I appreciate this opportunity to tes- tify on H.R. 6230, the elementary and secondary education amend- ments of 1967 and related acts. I have spent the majority of my career as an educator studying the ffnancing of State and local school sys- tems. During this time I have become quite conversant with many of the problems and have developed certain opinions on wha.t to do about them. I hope that these opinions will be helpful to you in your search for means of assisting State and local governments in providing for the educational needs of the Nation. The passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of i~6~ by the 89th Congress cast the Federal Government. in a new edu- PAGENO="0321" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1143 cational role. Traditionally the Federal Government has been viewed as a sympathetic although inactive supporter of public education. Now it is playing an increasingly important role in the formulation of educational policy and its financial participation, although still relatively small, is expanding rapidly. Despite its new importance in educational affairs, the Federal Government has continued to relate with existing educational agencies along traditional lines, through the exclusive use of categorical aids. I would like to consider with you some of my thoughts about the direction in which the Federal Government should move in order to permit a maturing of relationships between the Federal and State and local educational agencies. Then I wish to make specific recom- mendations concerning amendments to existing legislation. Many of the views which I express are similar to those contained in a position paper on Federal aid to education developed by the com- mittee on school finance and legislation of the Western New York School Study Council. Over 60 school boards in the eight western New York St.ate counties hold membership on this committee. These boards are responsible for the eduaction of nearly 300,000 children. A copy of their paper is attached for your information. Although I serve as an adviser to that group, I am not appearing on their behalf. I claim sole responsibility for the comments which are about to be made. Because my remarks focus upon means I consider appropriate for improving existing legislation, the.y may have a negative flavor to them. I am sure I share the feelings of the majority, if not all, of your committee that the Federal Government has a strong interest, in, and indeed a responsibility for, the welfare of the Nation's elementary and secondary schools. Therefore, I wish to state emphatically at the outset that. I see the legislation passed by recent Congresses as having accomplishe.d much that is good. It has made available resources which have enabled thousands, perhaps millions, of youngsters to get. a decent educational break for the first time. iii their lives. It has shaken up the educational establishment and has encouraged new thinking on old educational problems. It has encouraged the development of a community- wide view of education. It has enabled all districts to become innovators in education, not just the financially able.. A survey made by Project Innovation, the regional planning center for western Ne.w York funded under title III of the ESEA, has re- vealed t.hat over 90 percent of the innovations reported by school dis- tricts of the region were federally aided. On the other hand, all is not well with t.hese acts of 1e~'islation. Three weeks ago when I was discussing this subject. with my Con- gressman, R.ichard D. McCarthy, of the 39th New York Congressional District., I was appalled to learn that he had not received a single let- ter in support of the accomplishments of the ESEA legislation. This is probably because of the great frustration on the part. of t~ln- cationa.l administrators and the pUl)liC alike., not with the intent, of the legislation, but with its administration. Unless immediate relief f FO!u1 some of these frust.rations is provided, I am afraid that. the realization of the objective of substantial Federal support of education will he greatly delayed. 75-492--61--pt. 2-21 PAGENO="0322" 1144 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDITCATION AMENDMENTS All Federal legislation assisting schools focuses upon specific edu- cational or social problems. All Federal school aid is of a categorical nature with the exception of Public Law 874-aid to federally im- pacted areas. I wish to challenge t.he wisdom and the necessity of using th1s means for distributing massive amounts of Federal assistance to elementary and secondary schools. Prior to 1~65 the amount of Federal assistance was so small that there was not really great concern over how it was distributed. This is no longer the case. I reco~nize your dilemma. You want to provide financial assistance to elementary and secondary education, yet you also have a responsi- bility to the Federal taxpayer-who is also the State and local tax- payer-to see to it that the funds are properly spent. I suspect that you have underestimated the ability of the existing State and local machinery for providing you with adequate a~urances of the proper use of these funds. Objections to categorical aids are of at least four kinds: 1. ~ tend to shift decisionmaking to the aiding agency. 2. They tend to have an antiequalizing effect-rich school districts are. in a better position to take advantage of the aid than are poor districts. 3. They are very inefficient to administer. 4. They tend to fractionalize normally integrated educational pro- grams. Shift in decisionmaking. Students of public school finance have long recognized that categorical aids tend to shift the initiative for decisionmaking from the local school district to the agency giving the aid. Contrary to the pattern of Federal school aid, most States since 19~5 have developed formulas whereby they can distribute the bulk of State aid to local school districts efficiently and without interfering with the discretionary authority of local school boards to formulate local educational policies. The effect. of categorical aid upon the center of decisionmaking is well illustrated in a letter to me. from a member of the staff of the F.S. Office of Education dated November 18, 19~6, in response to the above mentioned position paper. (The information referred to follows:) DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE. Washington, D.C., November 18, 1966. Mr. At'STIN D. SWANSON. Con neil Associate, Western New York School Sti~dy Council, Buffalo, N.Y. DEAR MR. SWANSON: On behalf of Commissioner Howe thank you very much for sending us a copy of your position paper. Federal Aid to Education. We share your concern over the best means available to the Federal Govern- ment to aid educational institutions. We do believe, however, that the position of the Federal Government with respect to education differs from that of the State governments and such a difference justifies categorical aid. Clearly there is a growing interest in general aid to education, and I agree heartily with Commissioner Howe when he says there is a need to devise better formulas for the intelligent application of Federal resources. However, I would 1,rRe that anyone considering the proper Federal role in education place no small importance on categorical aid. Our experience with the National Defense Education Act demonstrates the importance of categorical programs. For example. it is very doubtful that we would have made such remarkable progress PAGENO="0323" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1145 in iniptuving and extending modern foreign language instructiun in ur schools and c ileges over the past seveit years without the categorical aid progritins of the N I )EA. Language instruction was in a deplorable state and pruvi(Ied a ~itiiatiuii which could not continue without a real hinderatice to tile national interest. W e have seen ito evidence to support tile view that t lie saute progress wanT have l)eeli niade had the decision been left to each of the () states as to which prugrailis should be supported. Across the board support at e(lucation lu:is mmli to recomniend it and while we would welcome it. there is and should be continued interest in categorical programs which recognize particular national interests aiid concerns. Thank you again. Rest assured the conunents made in your position paper will be discussed in developing our legislative program. If the Office of Legislation can be of further assistance, please let us know. Sincerely yours, AUGUST W. STEINHILBER, Specialist for Legislation. DECEMBER 7, 1966. Mr. AUGUsT W. STEINHILBER, Specialist for Legislation, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education, Washington. D.C. DEAR Mit. STEINHILBER: Thank you for your thoughtful remarks concerning the position paper of the Committee on School Finance and Legislation of the Western New York School Study Council. "Federal Aid to Education." Your letter of November 18, 1966 urged that `anyone considering the iiroimr Federal role in education place no small importance on categorical aid." The position paper does recognize that under certain (ir(umstan('es categorical aid may he justified. Proposal 1 on page 5 includes the following commentary: "Categorical aid should be provided by the Federal Government only in those instances where the Federal Government determines that it is in the national interest that particular types of programs or particular activities be included in the public school programs of the nation. In such instances the Federal Govern- ment should honestly admit that it is deliberately trying to influence, if not control, the programs of the public schools of the nation in these areas. Cate- gorical aid should not require matching funds from state and local governments." The concern of the Committee is that with categorical aid there is a substantial amount of controL If the Federal Government is sincere in its disclaimers of control which have been included in all educational legislation to date. it should refrain from any further enactments of categorical aid laws except where it is convinced that the areas of assistance are crucial to the national interest and where it is apparent that the same ends cannot be achieved without interfering with the local decision-making process. In such cases there is no justification for a disclaimer of control. for the very purpose of such legislation is to control those areas covered by the legislation. It may be, prior to the enactment of NDEA. as you state in your letter, that "language instruction was in a deplorable state and provided a situation which could not continue without a real hindrance to the national interest." Many would question the assertion that the state of foreign language instruction was a real hindrance to the national interest and whether the expenditure of funds for foreign language instruction was the most critical of all the needs to he met by the public schools. Your next sentence clearly indicates that the purpose of NDEA is to deliberately interfere with the local deeision-making process when you state that you have "seen no evidence to support the view that the same prog- ress would have been made had the decision been left to each of the fifty States as to which programs should have been supported." Thi' Committee does not deny that the Federal Government has iii! interest in the status of education. It only asks that the Federal Government not ap- proa(~h these tasks lightly: that in such instances where it finds categorictil aids necessary. it not disclaim any interest in control of the public schools: and that such programs, unlike the NDEA. be financed wholly from Federal fietis. Sincerely yours. AisTlx T). S\v~xSON. Acting E.!('(u ttii~ ~ecret(l1!/. PAGENO="0324" 1146 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTCATION AMENDMENTS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE, Washington, D.C.. December 22, 1966. Mr. ArsTIx D. SWANSON, Acting E.recu tire Secretary, Western New York School Study Council, State Lnircrsity of Nc w York at Buffalo, Bvffalo, N.Y. DEAn Ma. SWANSON: After a thorough study of your latest letter of December 7. I whole heartily agree with the last paragraph which reads, "Tills Committee does not deny that the Federal Government has an interest in the status of education. It only asks that the Federal Government not ap- proacli these tasks lightly; that in such instances where it finds categorical aids necessary, it not disclaim any interest in control of the public schools; and that such programs, unlike the NDEA. be financed wholly from Federal funds." We obviously agree in philosophy and perhaps also agree in the application of this philosophy. For example, the Office of Education has supported a more categorical approach to Federal aid as evidenced by expanding the NDEA cate- gories. elimination of categories under the Higher Education Facilities Act, and the general aid approach for programs under P.L. 80-10. My reference to support categorical aid was perhaps prompted by my inter- pretation of general tenor of your study council report rather than any one specific item. or perhaps by the comments of many other educators of this sub- ject. In short. I siniply wish to emphasize our continued interest in categorical prngrams. Thank you again for giving us much food for thought. Sincerely yours, AUGUST W. STEIN HILBER, Specialist for Legislatfiin Dr. SWANSON. There. is no doubt but that. the categorical aid made a much greater impact upon foreign language instruction in most school districts than if the determination of tile use of the money had been left to the. State and local agencies. But was this the best edu- cat ional use of the money ? Were the guides prescribed tile most effective, way of improving language instruction? Was this condition really a threat to the national security? Was it more of a threat than multitudes of other aspects of well-rounded educational programs which were not. aided? Which level of government is best able to judge each kind of educational issue? Perhaps the reason the States have made such wide use of general aid to local educational agencies is that they can control local edu- cational agencies without the use of financial coercion. The schools are State mstitutions, locally operated. and as such are subject to State re~u1ation. The Federal Government has no direct authority over State and hoca.1 educational agencies: therefore, Congress must rely upon finan- cial coercion through categorical type aids if it is to have any influence over their decisions. But, if Congress concern is over the general health of publicly su~)ported e(lucation with no desire to exert any specific control over what goes on in the schools-as it has stated on several occasions- then it is not necessary to pei'sist in this cumbersome manner of dis- tribut ing money. I believe that the priu(ip;ll nat~onai concern should be for a well- l'oun(led ennipiehe~isive educational program for all youth. Categori- cal aid is disfunctional for this ~ 1 can conceive of instances where Congress. with perfect justification. may wish to lead State and local agencies to certain type decisions. In such instances, categorical aids are the vehicles to use. But. I urge you to fully recognize that when on legislate such aid, von are in effect superseding decisions made at another level of PAGENO="0325" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLCATION AMENDMENTS 1147 government with one. which is made in Washington. I would also urge that you take such drastic action only when there is no r(~asonable doubt that `Washington is in the best~ position to make such (leelsions. Antiequalizatioii effect. Categorical type aids ofi en have an anti- equalization effect, that is poorer and smaller districts lie ~t a dis- advantage compared with richer districts in sedurin~ such aids. Categorical aids normally require a written I)roposal for each proj- ect for w'hich aid is sought. Federal or State officials use these pro- posals to judge the a.cceptabilit.y of the. project under the criteria es- tablished in the enabling legislation. Poorer and smaller districts as a rule neither have the quantity nor quality of personnel to compete for Federal moneys in this fashion. A matching fund requirement often accompanies categorical aids. This is the case with the NDEA legislation, but fortunately is not the case with ESEA. Poorer districts are again at a disadvantage com- pared with richer districts in raising the necessary local monies to qualify for supplemental moneys. When it is the view of Congress that its objectives can be accomplished only through categorical type aid, the Federal Government should finance completely the projects involved as it doe.s with ESEA. Administrative inefficiency. A third weakness of categorical aid is in its administration. It is a very inefficient means by which to distribute public moneys. It requires a large number of administra- tors, a large number of forms, and a large number of files. The New York State Education Department requires approximately 30 times the manpower to distribute $1 of Federal aid than is required to dis- tribute $1 of State aid. The State aid is principally of a general aid nature. A similar situation is developing in local school dist.ricts. `Within the past year many administrators have been appointed at this level whose sole purpose is to keep abreast~ of developments in the Federal arena and to write, submit., and revise proposals to qualify the district for Federal aid to education-this, despite the fact. that in most dis- tricts only about 5 percent of operating costs w'ill be met through Federal funds. Can you imagine time administrative bureaucracy that would be neces- sary if Congress should decide to substantially increase its support of education within the limits of cat e.gorical aids. A shortage of competent professional personnel existed prior to ESEA. ESEA unnecessarily aggravated time situation by creating many administrative positions of limited utility. rf 0 further com- pound the staffing situation, because of the tenuous nature of many federally financed programs, it. has been necessary to pay certain personnel premium salaries in order to encourage them to take the risk. Difficult to integrate. A final general weakimess of categorical aids is that it is difficult to integrate the projects they finance into the regu- lar on going educational program. In order to qualify for aid, an activity must be artifically separated from the regular program, at least for accounting and evaluation purposes and often for other purposes such as employment of personnel. It is also difficult to do long range planning for such projects because of the tenuous nature of their financing. PAGENO="0326" 1148 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS In order to gain full benefit from Federal participation in educa- tional matters I strongly urge Congress to move rapidly toward re- placing most. existing categorical aids with a general aid to the States for redistribution to local educational agencies. In shaping a new Federal posture I recommend the following principles: 1. Federal aid to education should be general in nature, le.avin~ the decision for its allocation to State and local school authorities. Cate- gorical aid should be provided by the Federal Government only in those instances where the Federal Government determines that it is in the national interest that particular types of programs or particular activities be include.d in the public school programs of the Nation. In such instances the Federal Government should clearly indicate its intentions to influence, if not control, the programs of the public schools of the country in these areas. Categorical aid should not require matching funds from State and local governments. 2. Federal aid should be distributed to the States on an equalized basis; that is, the amount of Federal aid made available to the States should be in inverse ratio to the wealth of the State. The concept of equalization is one which is firmly imbeded in most if not all of the State aid programs of the 50 United States. In establishing a Federal equalization policy however; the prin- ciples developed at the State and local level cannot be directly applied to the situation at the national level. The chief reason prohibiting such an application is the fact that while most States exist within a single economic region, there are several economic regions within the United States. In a public service industry such an education, by far the prin- cipal cost, approximately 70 percent, is labor. The costs of labor vary markedly from one economic region to another thereby signifi- cantly influencing the cost of educational programs for a given amount of service. This means that poorer regions as measured by personal income can provide comparable. educational services at a lower cost than can richer regions because of lower labor costs. This phenomenon tends to reduce, although not eliminate, the varia- tion in ability among States to support. educational services. 3. Federal aid programs should recognize the integrity of each State. All Federal moneys for education should be distributed through the established State authority for public education, normally the State education department. 4. Public money must be administered in the public domain. If Federal moneys are to be appropriate and used for children in private schools, the accountability for the use of these moneys must remain within the public domain through the State designated local educa- tional agency. 5. Since basic research into matters related to human learning and development are of equal value and importance to all segments of our Nation, the Federal Government should continue and expand its financing of such activities. Likewise it should expand its efforts to disseminate resulting discoveries and applications so that t.he timelag between invention and widespread application may be substantially reduced. PAGENO="0327" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS 1149 6. The responsibilities of the L~. Office of Education should be increased in the areas of providing Ie.a(lersllip and reduced in the areas of administering categorical aid programs. The nature of the 1~.S. Office of Education role should be one of influencing educational adaptation through field service leadership activities rather than through administering acts of financial coercion. This means the massing of a considerable body of knowledgeable persons in the U.S. Office of Education which would be available to States and local school districts at their request to assist them in educational planning and evaluation. Long-term recommendation: I contend that the greatest immediate need for Federal funds lies in making available in all States a general level of financial support adequate to provide acceptable levels of educational services. A large number of States do not have the resources necessary to provide such programs even with confiscatory t.ax efforts. Federal funds are the only solution for these States. Providing genera.1 tax relief to all States is of secondary importance. I would like to recommend for your consideration a formula developed by the Committee for Economic Development. It is reported in their publication entitled "Paying for Better Public Schools," September 1961. The illustration is based on 1957 data. It is a program designed to aid education in States with personal income per student in average daily attendance in public schools that is below 80 percent of the national average. For each st.udent in average daily at.tendance this program would pay such States an amount equal to the product of (1) the amount by which its personal income per student in average daily attendance falls short of 80 percent of the national average, and (2) the national ratio of current school expenditures to personal income. For example, personal income ier student in average daily attend- ance in the Nation as a whole was $11,44G. Eighty percent of this was $9,157. In Mississippi, personal income per student in average daily attendance wa.s only $4,893. Subtracting $4,893 from $9,157 give $4.264. In the Nation as a whole, current school expenditures equalled 2.83 percent of personal income. For each student in average daily attendance Mississippi would get 2.83 percent of $4,264 or $121. With 444,200 students, Mississippi would thus receive a total grant of $54 million. Such a program would permit any State to reach the SO-percent level in current expenditures by devoting the same proportion of its residents' income to current school expenditure as the Nation as a whole. And they could do better by providing more. The specifics of the formula may be altered to satisfy your analysis. For example, it would make good sense to me to use the national aver- age personal income per student as the reference figure rather than 80 percent of it. Thirty-three States fell below this figure in 1965. If it is Congress' desire to provide general assistance to all States, and it might be politically expedient to do so, this could be accom- plished by making a minimum grant to all States of say. Sl00 per student. Any general aid formula should carry with it a provision requiring the maintenance of State and local effort. PAGENO="0328" 1150 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS I recognize the transition to general aid cannot be accomplished this year. But the planning for such could commence. During the planning period I would recommend that: 1. The objectives of all Federal aids to elementary and secondary schools should be reviewed. Those which are critical to the national interest and which could not otherwise be achieved should be con- tinued. 2. Tie~c~e categorical aids whose purposes are not critical to the na- tional interest should be discontinued and replaced with a general aid formula. 3. The Federal resources should be reviewed to determine the amount of supplementary moneys which could reasonably be added to item 2 for distribution through a general aid formula. 4. Appropriations should be made t.o the U.S. Office of Education for the purpose of planning its transition from a basically admin- istrative unit to one capable of providing to the Nation dynamic edu- cational leadership through extensive field services. Recommendations for immediately needed amendments to existing le~rislation 1. Simplify the application and reporting procedures under titles I and II of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Under these titles, allocations are developed for each school dist.rict. Presently it. is necessary for a district to apply for these funds and to develop lengthy proposals for each of a series of discrete projects whose budgets equal the amount of the allocations. Complete and discrete records and evaluations must be made. These proposals are reviewed and judged by the respective State education departments and funded or rejected. The Federal interests could be safeguarded with much less redtape through the existing regulatory and supervisory powers of a State. This could be ac- compli shed bi~ having t.he local educational agency claim its allocation from the State through a resolution of its board of trustees indicating among other thin~s that it would spend the allocation according to the federally developed criteria. The supervisory personnel now used to read and judge proposals could he released for working directly with local educational agencies in stimulating and planning new educational procedures and for evaluating exist in~ ones. A brief annual report. on the use of funds should be require.d of each district as should a financial audit. The present emphasis on evaluation should be continued. 2. Make appropriations for school aid earlier. Most school districts operate on the same flscal year as does the Federal Government, and like the Federal Government. they must plan their programs, expendi- tures, and revenues well in advance of the beginning of their fiscal year. The nature of education is such that the hulk of expenditures goes for securing the services of professionally trained personnel. When additional ner~onnel are required to carry out a program they must be recruited several months prior to the assuming of the.ir respective positions. All of this adds up to the fact. that the availability of Federal moneys should be known by local school districts no Lifer thn.n the. January preceding the fiscal year in which the moneys are to be used. PAGENO="0329" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1151 Under the status quo, school districts do not yet know the allocation for the present school year and probably won't know for at least an- other week or two. In the meantime, the districts have been operating programs on esti- mates and faith. For the most part. the estimates have been conserva- tive, which means that when school districts are notified of their alloca- tions they will have 5 months in which to plan, recruit, carry out., and evaluate proposals. This is not conducive to wise use of the money. On the other hand a few districts have badly over estimated the amrnmt of Federal funds they are to receive.. These districts will have to drastically curtail their programs during the remainder of the year. 3. Distribute all funds under title III, ESEA through the State educational agency. Shift a greater degree of control of titles I, II, and III, ESEA t.o the States permitting them to establish their own administrative pro- cedures to a maximum degree. 4. Permit judicial review of the aid provisions to private and de- nominational schools. The church-state issue has served as a major block to general Fed- eral aid to elementary and secondary schools for a century. The ac- commodations under ESEA do not satisfy either the denominational schools or the proponents of strict separation. This controversy will continue to jeopardize general aid proposals until the judiciary makes its position clear. Under existing circumstances it is virtually impossible t.o achieve standing in the court t.o challenge the constitutionality of the accom- modations without a specific provision by Congress. Mr. Chairman. this completes my prepared statement. I would be happy t.o entertain any questions the committee might. pose. Mr. BRADEMAS. Thank you, Mr. Swanson. Let. me. ask you a few questions al)out your statement if I may. We appreciate very much your observations. I must say, however, that I am somewhat astonished by the positions you assert in your statement for a very simple reason and maybe you can help me. I was brought up as a political scientist 011(1 trained to think that von ought aiwas to offer some evidence for your propositions and von have a lot of propositions but I am afraid not very much evidence. I find it. significant. that on page 2 of your statement. you say that: Ninety percent of the innovations reported by school districts of the region were federally aided. On page 3 you say you are appalled to learn t.hat one of our colleagues had received not a single letter in support of the accomplish- ments of ESEA legislation and you say: This is prohahly because of the great frustration on the part of the admin- istrators and the public alike with the administration of the bill. If I was your teacher in political science, I would probal)ly flunk you for that statement. Mi~'lit it not he 501(1 thjs is because most of them are satisfied? I clout know that this would be accurate either but I \vOlll(l lke to see more evidence for your conclusion that a mere assumpt on. PAGENO="0330" 1152 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Very often people write US when they are unhappy with the. acimin- istration of programs but dont. if they are 1mpp~ so maybe the reverse could be said. Dr. Sw~~NsoN. If I may elaborate a little, bit more on this conversa- tion. I did not put the other aspect of it in. There has been much controversy over certain distributions of the money and to the red- tape and this sort. of thing. He had heard this type of feedback. However, there had not been the positive feedback of the good which had been accomplished through the programs. Getting back to your other statement concerning the fact that 90 percent of the innovations were funded under Federal aid, I think what this indicates is that local school districts if they are given the re- sources are able to innovate and to establish good programs. With the money which they have through the State and local agencies, they are able to operate a normal oil-going program. Mr. BRADEMAS. Then why don't you vote more money at the State level for innovat.ion purposes? Dr. SWANSON. We are asking that the resources of the Federal Government which you must admit has the broadest and strongest tax base of any State join with the tax base of the State and with the tax base of t.he local level and together we need to provide an adequate level for innovative purposes? WThat, we. are indicating here is the money can be put to good use and local officials have shown that they can use this money profitably. Mr. BRADEMAS. I fail to see the validity of that argument. Dr. SWANSON. In the case of New York, it is difficult to say they are not putting forth a good deal of effort. Mr. BRADEMAS. I did not say that. you were not. I note. also you say on page 3: I suspect you have underestimated the ability of the existing State and local machinery for providing you with adequate assurances of the proper use of these funds. Again I would like evidence. Indeed we had some evidence in here these last. few days when Dr. Miller came in with his survey of title III programs and showed that there was almost no leadership of an effec- tive. and aggressive, kind being given by State. departments of public education. You may suspect we have underestimated the ability but once again where is the evidence'? Dr. SWANSON. Once again I can point to the State of New York where there is a strong education department.. i~IL BRADEM.\S. That is true but we all know New York has an exceptionally st long state department of education. Dr. SWANSON. It. has been developed through Stat.e resources and there is no reason why other States through additional support can- not also develop strong leadership institutions. But all State edu- cation departments do have the machinery whereby t.hey can and do enforce the regulations passed by the legislatures of the States. These vary. Sometimes they are extensive and sometimes they are not. Mr. BR.\DFM.\S. Mv time has al)out run out. You say the New `~ork state Eclucat irm T)eparrment requires approximately ~(`) times the nI.allpu\veI dl) (listid aite ~1 of Federal aid than is required to dis- trll)ute ~1 of state a ~d. Can von really support that kind of an alle- gallon with facts and figures PAGENO="0331" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTJCATION AMENDMENTS 1153 Dr. SWANSON. Yes. In the Stat.e of New York $1,500 million is distributed to local school districts. It requires 25 personnel. in the State of New York Federal moneys amount to about $250 mil- lion. It requires 125 persons to distribute this money. Mr. BRADEMAS. I think you ought to look at your bureaucratic oper- ation in t.he Stat.e of New York. Dr. SWANSON. The difference is the State money is distributed on a general basis. The Federal money involves what is called an awful lot of paper massaging which requires five times as many people to dist.ribute one-sixth the money. Mr. BRADEMAS. I appreciate your coming but I am dubious about the assertions you have made and I find very little evidence to support them. Dr. SWAIcSON. I would like to comment just a little further here. Mr. BRADEMAS. I have no more time. 1 have talked too long. Mr. QUIE. I would like to use my 5 minutes on this side, too. I think you can see evidence in the U.S. Office of Education with respect to what has happened with categorical programs. With each new program there is a tremendous increase in personnel required. If we go to general aid, there. would be strenuous objection because these people would lose their jobs. Think of all of the people they have readin~ time proeets. I think you are making an excellent, point here of the increased work the further expansion of these Federal-aid programs has given us. One thing I noticed however that you must feel especially mag- nanimous about Federal aid to the State of New York when you suggest that the aid be made available in inverse proportions to the State's ability to pay for their education. I happen to believe in that myself, but you come from a State which is up there at the top in wealth and in expenditures for education. Are you able to get by with t.ha.t politically in New York? Dr. SWANSON. Fortunately, I don't have to get by. That. is why I recognized in my statement it would probably be politically expedient to provide something like $100 per pupil to take care of the good Con- gressmen from New York who also have to campaign for reelection. Mr. QInE. This is what we found to he a political iealitv when we changed this. Mr. Chairman, I won't use any more of my time. Dr. SWANSON. Could I use the remainder of your time to make one remark that was prompted over here? Mr. Quri~. Please. Dr. SWANSON. You said that. my statements were not backed by any type of evidence. The statements are backed with really the only kind of evidence we really do have. Let's face it; the Federal Gov- ernment is a newcomer in education. It has been interested for a long time but it. really has not been deeply involved. However, it has bee.n involved in the northwest. area, yes; but it has not been deeply involved in the development of educational systems. Mr. BRADEMAS. That is a different statement.. Dr. SWANSON. And the financing of them. So we have to draw our experience from the States. There is a pretty lengthy history of State involvement, here. We have made studies of this sort of thing. PAGENO="0332" 1154 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS We have observed the effect of different types of aid. It is on the basis of the State experience that many of these comments are made. Mr. Br~aDEM\s. What evidence~ do YOU have of that experience? Dr. Sw~~xsoN. The States got into aid to education in much the same fashion as the Federal Govemment is now, but l)y 1925 they recognized that. categorical-type aid was a cumbersome method of financing public school systems. rfl~en they began to move toward more general-type aids such as the foundation programs and more recently shared cost-type programs which are even more general than foun ci ati on-type programs. Chairman PERKINs. At this time we have several very important witnesses who have not been permitted to make their gener~l state- ment. Before we have further interrogation of the witnesses we will let the remaining witnesses complete their general statement. After they make their general statement, all of the witnesses will be seated at the table and there will not be an limit, on the questioning for just as long as you want to remain. At this time I a~rain welcome Msgr. James C. Donohue, director, Department of Education, United States Catholic Conference.. Monsignor I)onohue, how do you wish to proceed. STATEMENT OF MSGR. JAMES C. DONOHUE, DIRECTOR, DE- PARTMENT OF EDUCATION, U.S. CATHOLIC CONFERENCE; ACCOMPANIED BY MSGR. WILLIAM MeMAI~1TS, ARCHDIOCESE SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, CHICAGO, ILL.; AND JOHN CICCO, DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT, DIOCESE SCHOOLS, PITTS- BURGH, PA. Monsignor Doxoiivv. Mr. Chairman, first. let me introduce the men u-ho are accompanying me. On my right is Msgr. W~il1iam Mc.Manus. the superintendent, of schools for the archdiocese of Chicago. Chairman PERKINS. We. welcome you again, sir. He has been be- fore us several times. At this time I think we should call upon our distinguished colleague Congressman Pue.inski. Mr. PucIxsKI. I should like to join in w-elcoming Monsignor Mc.Namus to Washington again. We all realize the important and tremendous contribution that he and Monsignor Donohue, Mr. Cieco, and Mr. Conse.dine. have ma(le in behalf of the original legislation and the many contril)utmns they have made in helping us resolve many of these dih~cult and legal mud constitutional problems. In the years that I have, been here I found every time Monsignor McNamus comes before u5. he leaves with us a great contribution. ~ have high regard and respect. for him in Chicago and we welcome you here from Chicago. Monsignor f)oxojmnv. On my far right is .Tohn Cicco, deputy super- intendent of education for the diocese of Pittsburgh. Mr. Cicco also acts as a consultant to the Office of Education on participation of non- public. schoolchildren under title I of ESEA. Of course all of you I am sure are familiar with Mr. William Consedine, the director of the legal department.. I think it. might be just a good idea, Mr. Chairman, since we saw you last. to mention that. our organization has a new name. WTe were, as PAGENO="0333" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1155 you recall, the National Catholic Welfare Conference. We now are the TThitecl States Catholic Conference. It is so noted here. I would like to express to you and the committee my deep appre- ciation and that of my colleagues here today, for the opportunirv to be heard by the Congress as it considers its future actions on the provision of Federal aid to education. We welcome the opportunity to express to the members of this com- mittee and your congressional colleagues, the gratitude of the 6,027,- 756 elementary and secondary school chulclren and their parents whom we represent, for your efforts to raise the educational standards of all segments of American education, both private and public, with the assistance of Federal programs. In the short. span of 2 years, the Elementary and Secondary Educa- tion Act of 1965 has brought educational services to over 1.200,000 private school students. Eighty-five percent of the children in non- public schools have received, on loan, library books, textbooks and audiovisual materials. Almost 40,000 private school teachers have par- ticipated in inservice training programs. From a study underway at the Office of Education of the United States Catholic. Conference, the following examples of title I participation by parochial school children are most encouraging: Denver, Cob.: 1,225 educationally deprived children participating in language arts and reading programs at the elementary level and tutorial programs at the secondary level. Participation in teacher workshops and the use of such equipment~ as reading machines, tape recorders, overhead projectors, and film projectors. Dubuque, Iowa~: 2,552 students in corrective reading programs; 1.249 students participate in health services and 239 in speech therapy classes. Other services available to students inchicle counseling and remedial reading, math, and English; 100 teachers attend inservice education classes. Santa Fe, N. Mex.: Remedial reading and mathematics, guidance and counseling, speech therapy for 11,605 students. Youngstown, Ohio: 44 schools and 852 children participate in a wide variety of programs such as psychological services, health and guidance services, visiting teacher services, speech and hearing serv- ices. junior high shop and home economics programs. Pittsburgh, Pa.: 13,702 elementary school students and 1,083 sec- ondary school students participate in remedial reading and math, special services such as speech, hearing and psychological, language arts, and educational TV. It is significant to note that in all of these cases there has been a high degree of consultation and cooperation between public and private school educators. Before this committee last year, I noted that~ there were areas of the Nation where participation of children in private schools was less tha.n equitable. At that time, I ventured the confidence that more ex- perience. under the act would help to improve these situations. I a.m happy to report. tha.t in several circumstances this confidence was justified. In California, Maryland, Kansas, Missouri, to name a few, our permissible participation has improved (luring 1966. These results derive in no small measure from the effective efforts of the U.S. PAGENO="0334" 1156 ELEMENTAllY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Office of Education and I would like to pay tril)llte to Comniissioner I-lowe and his stall for their concern and fair handling of these ~ robi en s. There are still some problem areas where participatioli is less than realistic and a few places where it is all but nonexistent. Some State constitutional prohibitions are still a major roadblock to equitable treatment for private school students. In other areas there persist niistaken impressions barring permissible programs for private school children. Each area requires, now, patient efforts at implementation, to fully achieve the congressional purpose. We are encouraged, too, by the new regulations published last month and feel the clarified language and more positive approach to private school participation will help resolve many of the remaining diffi- culties. It is now clear that each local education agency shall provide educational services to meet the special educational needs of the educa- tionally deprived children enrolled in private schools. Genuine opportunities to participate will be improved by the provi- sion for consultation with persous knowledgeable of the needs of those children. One of the largest problems being faced in the implementation of ESEA programs is lack of adequately trained personnel. I am sure you have heard this from every public school administrator who has appeared before you. There is a large, trained, able, and willing body of educators which has not been tapped. I am speaking of more than 117,000 private elementary and secondary school teachers who could be available at least on a part-time basis, and in many cases on a full-time basis, to staff ESEA programs. There is no question in my mind that private schools, and their teachers, can offer valuable additional services to the community. I think this has been proved by our involvement in Headstart. Throughout the country, countless nonpublic agencies have re- sponded with eagerness and imagination. The legislation has en- couraged all agencies, public and nonpublic, to pool their resources by lending whatever skills, talents, and personnel available to help all children wherever they may be. Side by side, public and nonpublic personnel, facilities, and resources enter daily into this community effort. The same potential is availale for broadened educational programs. If the passage of the ESEA of 1965 told nonpublic school educators anything it told them they were partners in the total American education effort. We would like to be not only receiving partners but contributing partners as well. I would now like comment briefly on five of the amendements being considered in connection with possible changes in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. First, we support the Teacher Corps program enthusiastically and agree it should be placed in title I of ESEA. We also support the extension of the program for a 3-year period. A number of our col- leges. including Trinity College here in Washington, are participating as training centers for Teacher Corps volunteers. Talking with people on these campuses has led me to believe the status of the program can affect the morale and commitment of the young people in training. Bringing the Teacher Corps into the PAGENO="0335" ELEMLNTAEY ANI) ST~COYD\RY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1157 mainstream of t.he Federal aid program will do much to give it the status and support it needs. Second, we support amending title V of ESEA to provide for a comprehensive statewide program of systematic planning toward achievement of opportunities for high quality education for all seg- ments of the population. This comprehensive approach is recognition of the pluralistic character of the American education community. Total educational needs and goals cannot be set if the States do not have any idea of what the private schools are expected to do and what the special educational needs of children who attend those schools may be. The presence of parallel education systems in an areas has con- sequences for the form and quality of educational services in that area. Failure of the two systems to develop an adequate exchange of ideas on education and to plan joint.l~r for the future can reduce the effectiveness of that education for the entire population. Third, we endorse fully the proposal to provide greater educational opportunities for handicapped children. I think it is significant to note tht the wholehearted and enthusiastic cooperation between the public and private sector in this field proceeded by many years the educational ecumenism engendered by the ESEA. Fourth, we commend those who would amend the disaster school assistance authority of Public Law 81-815 to authorize construction assistance to the local educational agency where private school facili- ties are destroyed and will not be replaced. This is an eminently fair and just provision. Fifth, we certainly applaud all the programs and projects in voca- tional education. We solicit earnest consideration by the committee for inclusion in the law of provisions comparable to title I, section 205(a) (2) of Public Law 89-10, which under 1I.R. 6230 would become section 105(a) (2). This would merely assure that to the extent con- sistent with the enrollment in private schools of educationally de- prived children residing in the school district receiving a project grant, that provision be made for their participation in these programs. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee for giving me the opportunity to appear before you today. My colleagues and I will be happy to answer any questions you might have. We recog- nize your sincere concern for the educational well-being of the chil- dren of our country. We too are concerned. We stand ready to assist you in any way possible. Chairman PERKINS. I want to thank you, Monsignor, for your ap- pearance and Monsignor McManus and all of the distinguished who have come here to assist us. Mr. Quie? Mr. QUIE. I would like to ask a question of you with regard to the followup program as being proposed by the President and we have iiot. yet heard from the administration how they are going to imple- ment that. We have the. private schools involved directly in IIe.adst.art. and we have. the. title I language now which permits shared time and mobile services and even in some cases the pill)1 IC school paying the teacher I)rovidilnr renieclial services, conducting his `a' 11cr activities within the private school. PAGENO="0336" 1158 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS We have really these two ways of handling private school relation- ship to children, the one with the direct assistance and contract by the community acton agency, what is preschool, and inschool the title I type relationship. I think this. arrangement follows a brief that. was presented to us probably in 1961 or l96~ from the hEW with the help of the Justice Department, stating that under the Const.itution~ it was permissible for the. Federal Government to make a direct contribution to education because it. was not compulsory. I assume they use the same reasoning in the preschool level because it is not compulsory for them to attend school either. The following program will be in the grade level where it will be compulsory to attend and we are dealing with the children where a large number of them have been reached by the private schools. Have you any suggestion on these programs so we can have another wedding of the two systems? Monsignor DoNonu~. Both Monsignor McManus in Chicago and Mr. Cicco in Pit.t.sburg are deeply involved in Headst art and I would ask them to speak t.o that. Monsignor MCMANUS. We have 900 children under Headst.art. We share your concern and that of t.he administration for the development of a plan to followup on the good work accomplished during the 1~ months of the children development program in which we have much more confidence incidentally than in the short-term program of the summer. Mr. QUIE. Are your 900 preschool children in a year-round pro- grain? Monsignor McMANUS. Yes. For the summer program we are nego- tiating now for approximately 1,500 to 1,700 children over and above the 900 who a.re on the year-round program. We are considering at. our own expense the extension of our kinder- garten program in the central city a.nd with a curriculum that will followup, followthrough on the program of the child development courses. Thereafter we would envision an ungraded primary with the target being, by the time. these youngsters reach the fourth grade, the inter- mediate level, they will be on grade levels certainly in reading, be- cause we feel if they have reached that level by the time they get to the fourth grade their chances of getting all the way to high school are good and there is even a. possibility that a number of them would go on for higher education. Monsignor Donohue intimidated gent.ly in his presentation that the door is open for the Government to explore the possibility of con- tracting with nonpublic, schools for the followup program. On our part.. this would mean that. we would have t.o agree to t.he same non- sectarian terms that are expected of us under the child development program, that. we would employ teachers without regard t.o religious affiliation, that all children of a neighborhood would be accepted with- out regard t.o their religious denomination. This seems to be the trend in some of the more advanced thinking for t.he utilization of every conceivable resource in the central city in this all-out. effort to compensate for all of the deficiencies that these chil- dren and in the impoverished areas have to labor under. PAGENO="0337" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1159 If the Chicago Board of Education were to approach me for a con- tract for the utilization of one or two nonpublic schools, Catholic schools, according to nonsectarian terms to do this extraordinarily urgent and special work, I think we would have an open mind on it. This is what Monsignor Donohue meant I think by his remark that we have reached a degree of maturity in public-private school rela- tions where we have to, on our side of the fence, be as much concerned about how we are going to pitch iii and help as we are in what we are going to receive. So, in brief, I would say in answer to your question that the fol- lowup program will have to be twofold. Private agencies on their own with their own resources will have to followup and the door should be left open to contractual arrangements under ESEA and with local public school systems to do this particular kind of work. Mr. QrnE. I assume if we followed the same reasoning of that brief in 1961 we would not have any trouble with contractual rela- tionships at the kindergarten level. I would like to ask Mr. Consedine, do you think there will be any constitutional problems of such con- tractual relationships for grades 1, 2, and 3 which we know are abso- lutely necessary in the followthrough program. We have an agreement on the policy level. Now what about the constitutional question and the use of the private school? Mr. CONSEDINE. Congressman, I cannot accept the thesis of the HEWT brief that for some reason or other because chiTdren attend school under the compulsory attendance statutes and the parents choose a church-related school that this disqualifies them from partici- pating in Government programs. The short. answer is that if govern- inent is free to assist citizens voluntarily seeking an education, it would seem to be under a special obligation to aid them when compelled by the government to attend school. It is true the HEW took that position in its brief. We challenged it stoutly in the legal department study on the permissibility of in- cluding our children in any Federal aid programs. Since 1961 when we challenged their position, the Congress itself has very perceptibly faced the issue in the provisions of title I of ESEA. That. solution is by no means the outer limit of the permis- sible limit and thrust of Federal assistance to children enrolled in private schools. We attempted to make that clear in our legal department. study in which we found that there were no constitutional barriers based upon the decided cases and the historicity of the first amendment. Since that brief was prepared, the Supreme Court iii several decisions has made clear what the appropriate constitutional tests are. The Supreme Court. said in the Schemp case which involved the question of prayer reading and bible reading in the public schools that in deciding the issue of whether it was impermissible for the State, it. was the same issue in the earlier Eng7e case, to sponsor prayer in the public schools, the Court said that the test. of constitutionality that we must. look to what. is the primary purpose and effect. of the State action. In each case they found that the primary purpose of the State was to encourage the reading of the Lord's prayer or reading a eli~pter of thifl hihie. or to cite the New York State's regents' prayer 75-492 O-07-pt. 2-22 PAGENO="0338" 1160 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS prescribed in the State of New York and therefore, the State action was actually invalid. But keel) in mind the test they established. That is, what is the primary purpose and effect of the statute. Now if the primary purpose of the Federal Government is to achieve excellence in education and if the means utilized to achieve the congressional purpose is indeed secular, then there should be no barrier in the Federal Constitution to the Congress achieving in a secular way its permissible public puipose of encouraging education. Xow~ additionally, the Supreme Court said in the McGowan case since our study, a case involving the question of the validity of the Sunday closing statutes-now, obviously sabbat arians were disadvan- taged by State laws which said there must. be a compulsory day of rest and that. day of rest was ordained by most all of the States as Sunda.y. Now, Sunday as a day of rest and Sunday as a particularly important clay in the Christian calendar happened to coincide. It. was challenged on the grounds that this then was aid to a pal'- tic.ular religion. But. the Supreme Court in validating the Sunday closing statutes again announced the test of what. is the primary pur- l)O~~ and effect. It also concluded that. to the extent that the public. ptilpose of the Government. is a valid one and to the extent that the means that it utilizes to achieve, what is purely secular, that the mere fac.t that there may be an incidental, unavoidable, and minimal aid to some paitictilai' religion becomes irrelevant, in a constitutional sense. I say this because to suggest when considering the constitutional aspects that somehow or another, if you aid the children, if in a church- related institution there are Fedearl funds utilized to improve the educational processes or the education of the children, somehow there is a collateral benefit. to the institution. At. the college level this becomes clearly irrational because at the col- lege level or at the hospital level for example, whenever we get a Federal grant for a. secular facility, we must match it with funds of our own so the mere participation in and with the Government in accomplishing its puiposes in the educational field and in the health field, we derive no benefits. As a matter of fact, we incur disadvantages but. it is our coopera- tion with the Government. that. PromPts u~ to do these things. In sum I did not believe and I did not agree witi~ the HEW brief. In 1961 we answered it I thought very adequately and I will be glad to provide copies of our answer to the committee. I think since we made that rebuttal the Supreme Court in several decisions has added to the strength of our argument in announcing t.he test- Chairman PERKINS. I hate to interrupt you but Mr. Pucinski has to leave. Mr. Q~IE. May I ask unanimous consent that Mr. Consedine's an- swer to the HEW brief together with their answer be placed in the record at this point. I know some of our colleagues may feel they didn't. want to know that much but I appreciate having this lengthy statement in the record. Chairman PERKINS. It is so ordered. (The statement. follows :) PAGENO="0339" The Constitutionality of the Inclusion of Church-Related Schools in Federal Aid to Education LEGAL DEPARTMENT NATIONAL CATHOLIC WELFARE CONFERENCE Reprinted from TIlE GEORGETOWN LAW JOURNAL Vol. 30, No. 2 Winter, 19b1 1161) PAGENO="0340" PAGENO="0341" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1163 THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE INCLUSION OF CHURCH-RELATED SCHOOLS IN FEDERAL AID TO EDUCATION LEGAL DEPARTMENT NATIONAL CATHOLIC WELFARE CONFERENCE PAGENO="0342" 1164 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Preface 399 Introduction 401 I. The Education Crisis and National Survival 402 1. The Nature of the Crisis 402 2. Church-Related Schools and the Public Welfare 405 II. The Constitution and Church-Related Education 411 1. The "Religion" Clauses of the First Amendment 412 2. The Relevant Supreme Court Decisions 415 A. The Bradfield, Cochran and Everson Decisions 415 B. The McCollum and Zorach Decisions 422 C. The Meyer and Pierce Decisions 426 3. Legislation as Constitutional Precedent 433 4. Permissible Forms of Aid 434 Conclusions 437 Annex A. Statistical Tables 443 Annex B. Analysis of Memorandum of Department of Health, Education and Welfare of March 28, 1961 445 PAGENO="0343" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1165 PREFACE This study is one which the Legal Department (NCWC) has long planned to bring forth. The need for a comprehensive constitutional statement on the church-state issue in education and its relevance to long-standing NCWC policies was made vividly clear by the statements and confusion on these issues in this year's debate on federal aid to education. On March 28, 1961, the Department of Health, Education, and Wel- fare publicly issued its now widely read "Memorandum on the Impact of the First Amendment to the Constitution upon Federal Aid to Edu- cation." The Legal Department (NCWC) thereupon asked a number of constitutional scholars and lawyers for their independent critical analysis of the merits of that memorandum. The comments received in response to that request affirmed the necessity of presenting to the pub- lic a far more adequate analysis of the constitutional issues involved. Accordingly, as Director of the Legal Department, I requested William B. Ball, Esquire, of Harrisburg, to prepare such an analysis in co- operation with members of our staff. I wish to express my great grati- tude to Mr. Ball for the selfless dedication and splendid competence which he has devoted to this task. I also wish to express special appre- ciation to George E. Reed, Esquire, of the Legal Department (NCWC), and to Charles M. Whelan, S.J., of the Georgetown University Law Center, who worked constantly upon this study and contributed to it in all phases of its preparation. In presenting this study to the public, it is, of course, our hope that it will serve to clarify constitutional issues and to cause a more wide- spread recognition of the massive contribution of church-related and other private schools to the common welfare. However, should there not be presently achieved a just resolution to the problems with which this study deals, then it is our hope that we will at least have provided a basis for a continuing public dialogue respecting these problems. It is especially hoped that the presentation here made may stimulate in the educational and legal communities further intellectual interest. This hope has received solid encouragement from the readiness with which many outstanding constitutional lawyers responded to our request for their advice and criticism when the preliminary draft of this study had been completed. Although a complete list of the authorities con- sulted would be too lengthy, we have a special debt of gratitude to PAGENO="0344" 1166 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Professor Wilber G. Katz of the University of Chicago Law School, Dean Paul R. Dean and Professor Chester J. Antieau of the George- town University Law Center, Professor Paul G. Kauper of the Univer- sity of Michigan Law School, and Professors Arthur E. Sutherland and Mark DeWolfe Howe of the Harvard Law School, for their valued comments. It is understood, of course, that none of the authorities con- sulted has committed himself by his -cooperation to an endorsement of the positions and policies advocated in this study. It has been the American experience in the past-and we are con- fident that it will be so in the future-that rational discussion of com- mon problems by men of good will must in the end yield beneficent results to all. WILLIAM R. CONSEDINE DIRECTOR LEGAL DEPARTMENT NATIONAL CATHOLIC WELFARE CONFERENCE 4()() PAGENO="0345" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1167 INTRODUCTION May the federal government, as part of a comprehensive program to promote educational excellence in the nation, provide secular educational benefits to the public in private nonprofit schools, church-related as well as nondenominational? This is the general constitutional question to which this study is addressed. Three related questions are not treated: the basic constitutionality of federal aid to education; the constitu- tionality of federal aid to education exclusively in public schools; and the constitutionality of federal aid to religious instruction.1 The providing of secular education is unquestionably a public service and may be financed with public monies. It is equally unquestionable that secular educition is provided in private nonprofit schools, church- related as well as nondenominational. Accordingly, the public may pro- vide transportation for school children to private nonprofit schools.2 Whether the public may also help provide the secular education it- self in private nonprofit schools, both church-related and nondenomina- tional, is the precise question left open by the Supreme Court by its denial of certiorari in the Vermont school tuition case.3 Two contentions deserve summary disposition at the outset. One is that whatever helps religion is unconstitutional. The other is that reli- gious benefit or detriment is irrelevant to the constitutionality of non- religious governmental programs. Both contentions have been flatly rejected once again by the Supreme Court in the Sunday Law Cases.4 The question actually is not whether religion is helped oi hurt by the providing of secular educational benefits in all private nonprofit as well as public schools, but whether the help or hurt that results from such a nonreligious educational program is the kind of benefit or detriment forbidden by the first amendment. This study does not deal with the constitutionality of legislation which has financial benefit to church- 1 It should be noted that this study makes no attempt to explore the further practical question of whether there in fact exists a need for large-scale federal aid to education. While, as is stated infra, there is no doubt that the nation now faces an educational crisis, there are, notoriously, radical differences in views as to the means necessary to resolve that crisis. These involve economic, educational, and political factors which it is not a purpose of the study to evaluate. 2 Everson v. Board of Educ., 330 U.S. 1 (1947); Snyder v. Town of Newton, 365 U.S. 299 (1961) (appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question). 3 Anderson v. Swart, 366 U.S. 925 (1961). ~ McGowan v. Maryland, 366 U.S. 420 (1961). 4( )1 PAGENO="0346" 1168 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS related schools as its primary purpose or effect. It deals with the con- stitutionality of legislation which aims at the promotion and improve- ment of the education necessary for the general welfare-our culture, prosperity, and defense-and which for these purposes seeks to improve educational opportunities in both public and private nonprofit schools. I THE EDUCATION CRISIS AND NATIONAL SURVIVAL 1. The Nature of the Crisis Our intellectual and creative resources, then, are our first assets. And the more we invest in them, the greater the returns in every aspect of our lives. Human capital has taken priority over material capital both as a public and private investment. Thus did the Regents of the University of the State of New York underscore the stellar importance which is being ever more generally ascribed to education in the United States today. At least since the appearance of Sputnik similar declarations have been made by leaders in all sections of the land. President Kennedy, in his message to the Congress on February 20, 1961, stated that the nation's twin educa- tional goals must be "a new standard of excellence in education-and the availability of such excellence to all who are willing and able to pursue it."5 He further stated that there is now required "the maximum development of every young American's capacity."6 Spurring the nationally felt need for more and better education has been, first of all, the genuine fear that the free world, of which the United States is the leader, may be destroyed through conquest, or may so far decline in position relative to Soviet power that it will inevitably become the subject of communism. Additionally, however, are other dynamic factors related to a fresh emphasis upon education. It is recognized that-communism aside-Americans have important mis- sions to perform both abroad and at home. The conquering of disease and of poverty, the improvement of cities, the advance of industry, the increase of useful invention, the realization of greater achievement in the arts-indeed also the entire complex of the problems of a vastly more populous civilization in a far more closely knit earth in a suddenly opened universe of space and planet: all these supply additional im- peratives to America's new effort to educate its young. ~ HR. Doc. No. 92, 87th Cong., 1st Sess. 2 (1961). 6 Id. at 1. 4U~ PAGENO="0347" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDIJCATION AMENDMENTS 1169 It should here be noted that the unvarying stress in all of the leading recent public pronouncements upon education is upon education as a national need and therefore as something to be rendered to all. It is never suggested in these statements that any racial or religious or economic or ethnic or income group, if educable, should be excluded. It would be unthinkable, moreover, that an expanded American educa- tional program would destroy certain values and traditions in American society without which that society would be no longer American. And all American educational and political leaders who have been proclaim- ing the new frontiers for our educational effort, have laid heavy and specific stress upon the need to maintain those values and traditions, indeed to revitalize them. Among the chief of these are the moral values of the Judaeo-Christian tradition. Requiring equal stress, because of its close relationship to freedom is that tradition of harmony-in-diversity which we call intellectual and cultural pluralism. The general increase of scientific endeavor and knowledge would in the end have been achieved in vain if the price paid for it were the acceptance of a moral order whose sole standard was the will of the state and of a pervasive conformity to a state-imposed single culture. While, as has been noted, no position is here taken respecting the need for federal aid to education, it is apparent that two principles should ideally govern an American educational program for the future: 1. It is in the national interest that every child have the opportunity for an education of excellence. 2. It is in the national interest that our moral heritage be preserved, along with our freedom to acquire education in diverse, non- state institutions. In simple terms this means that every American child should have equal opportunity, according to his talents, to acquire the best education pos- sible but to acquire it in such school as he or his parents, in the exercise of their judgment, deem most desirable, provided such school meets reasonable state requirements of intellectual and physical competency. To achieve this objective, government need not be restricted to a single technique in selecting programs of aid to education-such as to extend aid through the institution only, or solely through parent or solely through pupil. Any such technique may be reasonable and the choice thereof should be determined by government's informed view as to how education will best be advanced. 4( )3 PAGENO="0348" 1170 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS But if aid through institutions is the selected means, then if govern- mental aid is to be given through some institutions (even if a majority) which are deemed competent to carry on the task of educating citizens, then it should be given through all institutions similarly competent- unless constitutional requirements plainly dictate to the contrary. This is necessary to emphasize, since it is being strongly intimated in some quarters that nonstate schools somehow do not perform a public service; that especially the church-related schools are in some way alien to America; and that all which is nonstate inherently has no standing to receive state support.7 This view, far more than clear con- stitutional objection, lies at the heart of much of the controversy over aid to education in church-related schools. But to expose this view by plainly stating it is at once to scotch it, since it is immediately apparent not only that it attacks the great Ameri- can tradition of popular, church-related schooling, but that it also points the way to a totalitarian society. The campaign which it would inspire would begin with the forcing out of church-related education but its end could be a totally sovietized state. It is an irony of the present debate that this view should have made headway, because while it talks constitutionalism, it weakens constitu- tionalism and the related concept of a diverse and free society. What the debate now needs is fresh recollection of American traditions of cul- tural differentiation and private initiative, along with a far more exact- ing scrutiny of the American constitution-an organic document which over the generations has proved hospitable to enlarged concepts of social needs, while preserving individual freedom. Considering in a particular way both our public schools and our church-related schools, it would be a very great mistake to assume that the former need be any the less devoted to the expression of our tradi- tional moral values than are the latter. Indeed our great public school system-built by men of all faiths-should receive the particular interest (as it does the financial support) of those who are dedicated to the church-related schools, since no citizen should shirk his duty to work for the common good in all areas of society. ~ See, e.g., Hearings on Public School Assistance Act of 1961 Before the Subcommittee on Education of the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, 87th Cong., 1st Sess. 516, 527 (1961) (testimony of M. V. Little and Agnes Meyer); Hearings on the National Defense Education Act Before the Joint Subcommittee on Education of the House Com- mittee on Education and Labor, 87th Cong., 1st Sess. 238-39 (1961) (testimony of Dr. Edgar Fuller); Editorial, The New Republic, March 20, 1961. 4( )4 PAGENO="0349" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1171 On the other hand, the church-related and other private schools should be far better appreciated by that large part of the public which has not had direct association with them. 2. Church-Related Schools and the Public Welfare The church-related school, teaching largely the same curriculum as the public school for the general education of the citizen, is not an in- truding latecomer on the American educational scene. It represents, rather, our original source of popular education and, far from being a distractive force deviating from the American educational tradition, it stands instead at the core of that tradition and as a force which em- phasizes certain moral and spiritual values with which that tradition is identified. The elementary schools in all the colonies had the teaching of reli- gion as their chief aim and as their main component. And Massachusetts, in 1647, enacted what has been described as "the first system of public education in the colonies." Known as the "Old Deluder" Act, it provided: It being one chiefe proiect of ye ould deluder, Satan, to keepe men from the knowledge of ye Scriptures . . . . It is therefore ordred, yt evry towneship in this jurisdiction, aftr ye Lord hath increased ye number to SO housholders, shall then forthwth appoint one wth in their towne to teach all such children 8 New York, a nontheocratic colony, adopted a similar law. Education in New Jersey, Pennsylvania and throughout the South, was emphatically religious.9 One of the earliest tasks to which French and Spanish missionaries in America devoted themselves was the founding of schools. They were among the first in the land, and, while they offered training in secular subjects, they were religious in nature generally. The end of the colonial era and the coming of the Republic wit- nessed no change with respect to the strongly religious character of the American people, and it is not therefore surprising that hospitality to the religious upbringing of their children should have marked public attitudes toward education. The third article of the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 directly linked religion with good government and the well- being of society, and thus stated a major purpose of education: "Reli- gion, morality and knowledge, being necessary to good government 8 The Laws and Liberties of Massachusetts (1648) at 47(1929). ~ See Dunn, What Happened to Religious Education? 16 (1958). 4U5 PAGENO="0350" 1172 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged." The document has been described as "second only in importance to the Bill of Rights of the Constitution as a guar- antee of religious freedom." The Northwest Ordinance was re-enacted August 7, 1789 by the first session of the First Congress,'° the same Congress to which a few weeks later, on September 26, 1789, the Con- ference Committee report proposed the final draft of the first amend- ment. It was later praised in the highest terms by Webster1' and by Lincoln.12 The Southwest Ordinance, passed by the First Congress in 1790, applying to Tennessee and eventually to the entire Mississippi Territory, contained the same provision. Nor did the new education movement launched by Horace Mann in the 1830's seek the abolition of religion in the schools. To the contrary, it was definitely intended that the new schools should provide knowledge of religion along with traditional moral training. While Mann desired sectarianism kept out of the public school curriculum-what he called "special and peculiar instructions respecting theology"-he defined education to include moral and religious upbringing. He concluded his lecture in 1838 on "The Necessity of Education in a Republican Govern- ment" by stating: And, finally, by the term education I mean such a culture of our moral affec- tions and religious sensibilities, as in the course of nature and Providence shall lead to a subjection and conformity of all our appetites, propensities, and sentiments to the Will of Heaven.'3 Similar expressions from American educational leaders are to be found in abundance over the remaining decades of the nineteenth century and, indeed, down to the present. There is no purpose here to suggest criticism of the reasons why public school educaticm in America became to a considerable extent secular rather than religious, nor is it suggested that it is inevitably true that certain trends toward sterilizing the public schools of any minimal efforts to acquaint children with God or the Commandments or prayer will continue.'4 It is, on the other hand, merely pointed out that it can- 10 Stat. 549. 11 Quoted in 1 Am. Hist. Ass'n Rep. 56 (1896). 12 Speech in Columbus, Ohio, Sept. 16, 1859, in 1 Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln 549 (ed. Nicolay-Hay 1894). 13 2 Life and Works of Horace Mann 144 (1891). 14 See Resnick v. Dade County Bd. of Pub. Instruction, No. 59C 4928 and No. 59C 8873, Cir. Ct. of 11th Judicial Cir., Fla., May, 1961; Murray v. Curlett, No. 64708, Balti- PAGENO="0351" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDITCATIOX AMENDMENTS 1173 not with any accuracy be said that the American tradition of education is somehow a tradition of irreligion. On the contrary, it is a stubborn fact of our history that that tradition is one of hospitality to religious values and to a religiously based moral training. Today, church-related schools of the United States are making a vast and patent contribution to the public welfare. Considering the largest of the groups of these-the schools under the auspices of the Roman Catholic Church-the extensiveness of citizen education which it supplies is remarkable. The phrase of the preceding sentence-"citi- zen education which it supplies"-bears repeating, since, as will later be stressed herein, these schools supply not some form of special or eccen- tric training, of which society can take no notice, but education recog- nized by the state as meeting essential citizen needs. In 1960 there were enrolled in Catholic elementary schools 4,401,824 pupils.15 In the same year Catholic secondary schools had an enrollment of 885,406 students. It is estimated that in 1961 Catholic elementary schools are providing education to approximately four-and-a-half million children and Catholic secondary schools to approximately one million children, in 1960 Catholic elementary and secondary schools were educating 12.6% of the total school population, and for 1961 the percentage is believed to be slightly higher. In a number of states and the District of Columbia Catholic schools are educating considerably higher percentages of the children in school-in Rhode Island 25.8%, Wisconsin 23.3%, Pennsylvania 21.9%, Massachusetts 21.9%, Illinois 21.3%, New Hampshire 21%, New Jersey 21%, New York 20.8%, Delaware 18%, Minnesota 16.9%, Vermont 15.6%, Ohio 15.4%, Mary- land 15%, Missouri 14.8%, Connecticut 14.7%, Michigan 14.4%, Louisiana 14.3%, Nebraska 14.1%, District of Columbia 13.8%, Iowa 12.9%. Thus in nineteen states (and the District of Columbia) having a total school population of 21,868,683, and whose school population represents 51.9% of the total national school population, Catholic parochial schools are performing the public service of educating 18.6% of all children in elementary and secondary schools. While one child out of every ten American children in Hawaii receives in a Catholic school the complete education deemed adequate by the more Super. Ct., April 28, 1961; Engel v. Vitale, 10 N.Y.2d 174, 176 N.E.2d 579, 182 N.Y.S.2d 659, cert. granted, 30 U.S.L. Week 3177 (U.S. Dec. 5, 1961) (No. 468). 15 The statistics for which no other reference is given in the following paragraphs are contained in, or computed from, the figures given in the General Summary of The Official PAGENO="0352" 1174 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS state, approximately one out of five does so in Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Illinois and New Hampshire, while approximately one out of four does so in Wisconsin and Rhode Island. Catholic elementary schools are conducted in all of the fifty states, with a total, in 1960, of 10,662 schools throughout the nation. The num- ber of such schools per state varies from eight in Alaska to 1,136 in the state of New York. In the Archdiocese of Chicago alone are 426 Catholic elementary schools.16 In the city of Pittsburgh, Catholic ele- mentary schools educate 44% of the entire elementary school popula- tion.'7 There were in 1960 2,426 Catholic secondary schools in the United States. In 1960 there were 152,948 teachers staffing the Catholic secondary and elementary schools, the number being composed of 113,527 religious teachers and 39,421 lay teachers, the percentage of lay teachers now increasing rapidly in the Catholic schools (from, for example, 5.2% out of the total in 1948 to 25.8% of the total in 1960). Here it should be noted that the religious aspect in church-related schooling is an addition to, and that it is not a subtraction from, basic citizen-education requirements. The pupil in the church-related school learns essentially the same arithmetic, spelling, English, history, civics, foreign languages, geography, and science which it is required that the pupil in the public school learn. He learns religion in addition, and the religious dimensions of secular knowledge. But let it be again stressed: this is in addition, not in subtraction. Recalling that this study is at this point discussing simply the public welfare function of the church-related schools rather than the question of constitutionality of aid to such schools, it may be further noted that Catholic educational efforts-like many nonpublic educational efforts- have evolved over the years numerous schools of special achievement and schools for exceptional groups, such as the gifted and the mentally or physically handicapped, and have pioneered many valuable new teaching methods.'8 Catholic Directory (1961). See Appendix A of this study for a state-by-state sunimary of statistics on elementary and secondary school enrollment in the United States for 1960. 16 See The Official Catholic Directory 57-58 (1961). `~ Statistics on file in the Catholic Schools Office of the Diocese of Pittsburgh. 18 See Directory of Catholic Facilities for Exceptional Children in the United States (1958), listing facilities under Catholic auspices throughout the nation which are accom- modating a total of more than one million exceptional children. The 1958 edition of this Directory is currently being revised. PAGENO="0353" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDIJCATION AMENDMENTS 1175 The Catholic school, moreover, has always stressed patriotism and other civic virtues. It is an important force for social democracy in the nation. Historically, Catholic education proved a beneficent bridge by which immigrant passed to the status of American.19 Typically, the Catholic school has been a meeting place for children of different ethnic and economic backgrounds. Although the schools are primarily for the education of Catholic children, non-Catholic children are admitted as a matter of universal policy where there is room. The record of Catholic schools generally with respect to Negro and other nonwhite children has been distinctly creditable. These schools have for the most part not been located according to de facto zoning which divides neighborhoods racially or economically. Thus the Catholic school has been an invaluable training ground to prepare citizens for full participation in a pluralist society. It has been stated: If, as seems reasonable, the preservation and perpetuation of private and parochial schools are indispensab1e to the preservation of a pluralistic society, then those committed to a pluralistic America owe a great debt to the Catholic Church, just as those committed to a secular public school system owe it a great debt.2° No fact can be more obvious than the fact that the graduates of the Catholic schools are found in all classes, occupations and activities of American life, contributing commonly21 with all other citizens, publicly and privately, to the sustenance and development of the American society. From these schools have come men and women who have been faithful public servants, fruitful scientists, creative artists. Upon the coming of the wars in which the nation has been involved, the man of Catholic school training has never been classified as alien in loyalty or divisive in inclination; and as in peacetime he is agreeably known in all neighborhoods and all occupations, so in times of national peril he has been found in all theatres of war and upon every beachhead and place of struggle. It is assuredly a late day for argument respecting the value of the training which Catholic and other church-related schools have conferred upon the country through their graduates. 19 Herberg, Protestant-Catholic-Jew 162 (1956). 20 Pfeffer, Creeds in Competition 82 (1958). 21 This is noted by the Rossis: "We could find no evidence that parochial schools tend to alienate individual Catholics from their communities. Parochial school Catholics are as involved in community affairs as anyone else of comparable educational position." Peter and Alice Rossi, Some Effects of Parochial School Education in America, Daedalus 323 (Spring 1961). See also Fic.hter, Parochial School: A Sociological Study 109-31, 427-53 (1958). 4~) 75-492 O-G7--pt. 2-23 PAGENO="0354" 1176 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY ED~CATIOX AMENDMENTS The public welfare contribution of the Catholic schools must, however, be seen in one further aspect. In the school years 1957 and 1958 the average current expenditure per public school pupil in average daily attendance in the United States was $341.14.22 This means that the Catholics who supported the 5.3 million students in the Catholic elemen- tary and secondary schools in 1960 absorbed what would otherwise have been an expense for all taxpayers in the order of magnitude of $1.8 billion. Even this figure gives a wholly inadequate picture of the estimated savings to the country by virtue of the existence of all private schools, from the grade school level through college and the university. The total current expenditures, capital outlay, and interest of all private educational institutions in 1958 was $4 billion.23 For the period 1950-59, the same expenditures of all private elementary and secondary schools are estimated at $13.9 billion.24 This in turn throws into bold relief another aspect of the public welfare contribution of the Catholic school system: this immense financial value-attributable to, it must be borne in mind, the providing of essen- tial citizen education-is a value accruing to the nation not only out of the pay checks and savings accounts of millions of Catholic citizens but out of the very lives of a legion of other Catholic citizens-priests, nuns and brothers-who have dedicated themselves without recompense to teaching generation upon generation of young Americans. Up to this point, this study has not discussed the constitutionality of federal aid to church-related education. What appears beyond contra- diction, however, is the immense contribution to the public welfare made by church-related schools through their providing essential citizen educa- tion. The demands of the education crisis relate directly to this, since it is the clear imperative of the times that all of our means of educa- tion must be utilized to their fullest extent, consonant with constitu- tional requirements. It is equally imperative that the pluralist structure and the basic freedoms of the nation be not lost while the education crisis is sought to be resolved. This study is not a brief on behalf of the principle of federal aid to education. But it would appear undeniable that, so far as the question 22 Biennial Survey of Education in the United States: Statistics of State School Systems 1957-1958, at 73 (1961). 23 See U.S. Dept. of Health, Education, and Welfare, Trends 68 (1960). 24 See id. for figures on which this estimate is based. 41() PAGENO="0355" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1177 is one of policy and not of constitutional law, if the federal government offers aid to education in public schools, aid should similarly be offered to education in church-related schools. The question of policy considered, the problem of constitutionality may now be explored. II THE CONSTITUTION AND CHURCH-RELATED EDUCATION The question presented, in its broadest terms, is whether the federal government may aid education in church-related schools. However, no proposal has been made that government undertake to pay the full cost of the education provided in a church-related school. Such a proposal might involve constitutional problems not presented by proposals for limited support of such education and might moreover foreshadow total governmental control of such education. The forms of limited aid being chiefly discussed are: a. Matching grants to church-related educational institutions for secular instruction therein. b. Long-term loans to church-related educational institutions for secular instruction therein. c. Grants or loans of tuition to students, which may be used in church- related educational institutions. d. Tax benefits to parents as part or total reimbursement for tuition expended by them in church-related (or other) educational institu- tions. It is the conclusion of this study that (1) the church-related schools perform a public function which, by its nature is supportable by govern- ment; (2) that such support may be only in a degree proportionate to the value of the public function performed; (3) that such support may take the form of grants to institutions or of loans to institutions or the form of grants of tuition or tax benefits; (4) that the federal govern- ment may constitutionally provide support in any of the aforementioned forms. In order to ascertain whether the foregoing conclusions with respect to constitutionality are correct, it is needful, first of all, to examine those judicial decisions and other materials which provide the constitu- tional background. 411 PAGENO="0356" 1178 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1. The "Religion" Clauses of the First Amendment The first amendment provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . . ." The clause respecting "establishment" is the clause chiefly relied upon by the March 28, 1961 Memorandum of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare25 as blocking most kinds of grants, loans, or tuition payments for education in church-related schools. Therefore, preliminary to an examination of the relevant judicial decisions, it is desirable to ascertain the historic meaning of that clause. The No Establishment Clause was not the product of an anti-religious revolution. Unlike the French Revolution, the American Revolution was made by men of strong religious conviction. it is not conceivable that they would have written into their Constitution a clause the purpose of which would be to sterilize all public institutions of religious content. Virtually every document relating to the formation of the United States attests to this. The Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms, July 6, 1775, abounds with such phrases as "the divine Author of our existence," "reverence for our great Creator."26 In the Preamble and Resolution of the Virginia Convention, May 15, 1776, appeal is made to God as "the Searcher of hearts" respecting the sincerity of the colonists' declarations.27 The Declaration of Independence acknowledged God as the source of all human rights and stated that it is in order to secure these God-given rights that governments exist. The Articles of Confederation concluded by invoking "the Great Governor of the World."28 The Northwest and Southwest Ordinances, as has been noted, specifically related religion to education and good government. Story, writing in 1833, stated: Probably at the time of the adoption of the constitution, and of the first amendment to it . . . the general, if not the universal sentiment was, that Christianity ought to receive encouragement from the state, so far as it was not incompatible with the private rights of conscience, and the freedom of religious worship. An attempt to level all religions, and to make it a matter of state policy to hold all in utter indifference, would have created universal disappro- bation, if not universal indignation.29 25 Specific analysis of the Memorandum is contained in Annex B infra. 26 ~ Journal of Congress I, 134-39 (1800 ed.). 27 Quoted in Documents Illustrative of the Formation of the Union of the American States 19 (Tansill ed. 1927). 28 Id. at 35. ~ Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States § 1868 (1833). 412 PAGENO="0357" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTJCATION AMENDMENTS 1179 The prime purpose of the clause as then universally understood, was to prohibit the Congress from creating a national church or from giving any sect a preferred status.'° This is clear from the language of the original draft of the first amendment submitted by Madison to the House of Representatives: The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, or on any pretext, infringed.3' Professor Corwin comments: That is, Congress shall not prescribe a national faith, a possibility which those states with establishments of their own . . . probably regarded with fully as much concern as those which had gotten rid of their establishments.32 The clause contains, of course, no such wording as "separation of church and state" or "wall of separation of church and state."33 Used according to its historical intendment, "separation of church and state" is a concept familiar to all from the time of the adoption of the first amendment. The term "wall of separation of church and state" finds its way into the opinions of the Supreme Court almost a century later in the case of Reynolds v. United States.34 There the phrase was quoted from the well-known letter of Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists, the phrase plainly being employed in Reynolds in the same sense in which it was employed by Jefferson, namely, to show that the No Establishment Clause deprived Congress of power to prescribe religious practices. That Jefferson did not consider the clause to erect a wall which would prevent all relationship between government and religion is plain from his report to the President and Directors of the Literacy Fund of the state-supported University of Virginia in 1822: It was not however, to be understood that instruction in religious opinion and duties was meant to be precluded by the public authorities, as indifferent to the interests of society. On the contrary, the relations which exist between man and 30 Although there is some evidence that some considered the clause also as a protection of the right of the several states to maintain official church establishments. 31 1 Annals of Congress 434 (1789-91). (Emphasis added.) 32 Corwin, The Supreme Court as National School Board, 14 Law and Contemp. Prob. 11, 12 (1949). ~ Justice Frankfurter, in his concurring opinion in the Sunday Law Cases, states: "But the several opinions in Everson and McCollum, and in Zorach v. Clauson, 343 U.S. 306, make sufficiently clear that `separation' is not a self-deñning concept." McGowan v. Mary- land, 366 U.S. 420, 461 (1961). ~ 98 U.S. 145 (1878). 4 l~ PAGENO="0358" 1180 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS his Maker, and the duties resulting from those relations, are the most interesting and important to every human being and most incumbent upon his study and investigation.~ Jefferson then went so far as to suggest that the various sects establish religious schools on the confines of the university. It would not have made sense in 1791, any more than it does today, to say that the No Establishment Clause prevents relationships-even cooperative relationships-between state and church. It is instead clear that an essential purpose of the clause was to prevent governmental trans- gressions upon religious liberty. It was fear of this and not fear of religion which prompted the drafting of the first version of the clause. Madison's first draft reveals this, the context plainly being one of respect- ing rights of conscience. Jefferson's "Bill for Establishing Religious Freedom," exposing the meaning of the clause, stressed that religious liberty required that no man should be compelled to support "any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever."36 Far, therefore, from being a mechanical formula, prescribing auto-. matically a void between religion and the state, it was the original com- mon understanding of the No Establishment Clause, that it existed, in the main, for the protection of religious liberty. Indeed, it was there- fore properly seen as a pro-religion clause and not as an anti-religion clause. Such protection, it is plain, existed to preclude (a) the setting up of an official church; (b) approaching the equivalent thereof by giving any sect such a degree of preference that government would have provided a powerful inducement to the people to belong to such pre- ferred sect. The clause was never intended to exclude religion from the democratic processes and the political forum, nor to prevent the sects from taking advantage of these in peaceful competition for lawful benefits. The No Establishment Clause attacked preference by law. Certainly it was never understood to mean that religious institutions which perform public services are disqualified to receive compensation for them through the governmental organs of the society which has benefited by the services. Throughout the nineteenth century this was the accepted view of the matter. Story's views have been noted. Cooley, in his treatise, Constitu- 35 19 Writings of Thomas Jefferson 414 (Memorial ed. 1904). 36 12 Hening, Statutes at Large 84, 86 (1785). The original draft of the bill, with indica- tions of the deletions made by the Virginia Assembly, is given in 1 Stokes, Church and State in the United States 392-94 (1950). 414 PAGENO="0359" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1181 tional Limitations, makes it clear that the principal function of the No Establishment concept is to insure religious liberty.37 He states that certain things are not lawful under any of the American constitutions, among these: Any law respecting an establishment of religion. The legislatures have not been left at liberty to effect a union of Church and State, or to establish prefer- ences by law in favor of any one religious persuasion or mode of worship. There is not complete religious liberty where any one sect is favored by the State and given an advantage by law over other sects.38 2. The Relevant Supreme Court Decisions A. THE BRADFIELD, COCHRAN, AND EVERSON DECISIONS Bradfield v. Roberts, Cochran v. Board of Educ., and Everson v. Board of Educ. are the three decisions of the Supreme Court-and the only three-which directly concern aid-providing by government in the sense presented by the instant problem of federal aid to education in church-related schools. Bradfield v. Roberts39 lends support to the argument that federal aid to secular education in church-related schools, of the kind described herein on page 411 supra, would be constitutional. The Court there held that the appropriation by Congress of money to a Catholic hospital, as compensation for the treatment and cure of poor patients under a con- tract, did not constitute an appropriation to a religious society in viola- tion of the No Establishment Clause. The Court noted that the hospital was owned by a corporation and that, legally speaking, the corporation was secular and nonsectarian and subject solely to the control "of the government which created it." However, the Court also noted that the hospital was conducted under the auspices of the Roman Catholic Church. "The meaning of that allegation," Laid the Court, "is that the church 37 The Court in a recent case, in the context of discussing standing to sue, stated that "the writings of Madison, who was the First Amendment's architect, demonstrate that the establishment of a religion was equally feared because of its tendencies to political tyranny and subversion of civil authority." McGowan v. Maryland, 366 U.S. 420, 430 (1961). Later in the same case the Court quoted Madison's comment on his original draft of the first amendment (which was not adopted by the Congress): "Mr. Madison `said, he apprehended the meaning of the words to be, that Congress should not establish a religion, and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contrary to their conscience Id. at 441. 38 Cooley, Constitutional Limitations 469 (2d ed. 1871). ~ 175 U.S. 291 (1899). 4l~ PAGENO="0360" 1182 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS exercises great and perhaps controlling influence over the management of the hospital."4° The Court also noted that the stockholders of the corporation were all nuns. Thus the Court (1) did not rule that a direct appropriation to a sectarian institution would be unconstitutional; (2) did hold that a direct appropriation might be made, for the performance of a public function, to an institution conducted under the auspices of a church which exercised "perhaps controlling influence" over it. Most significant in the Brad ficid decision is the Court's direct disavowal of the point of view which had been advanced by those who brought the suit, that religious institutions performing public functions cannot, on account of the No Establishment Clause, be aided by government. The Court stated that the plaintiffs had said that Congress has no power to make "a law respecting a religious establishment," and then pointedly noted that "a law respecting a religious establishment" was "not synonymous with that [language] used in the Constitution," namely, a law respecting an establishment of religion."4' Cochran v. Board of Educ.42 established that the use of govern- ment funds to provide secular textbooks for parochial school students is constitutionally justifiable as an expenditure for a public purpose. Under Louisiana statutes, boards of education were directed to provide "school books for school children free of cost to such children," and appropria- tions were made accordingly. The plaintiffs contended that they were being taxed to support a private purpose, contrary to the provisions of the fourteenth amendment. They stated the purpose of the acts to be "to aid private, religious, sectarian and other schools not embraced in the public educational system of the state by furnishing textbooks free to the children attending such private schools."43 The Supreme Court held the appropriations and the program of providing textbooks constitutional, in spite of the fact that children receiving textbooks under the program were enrolled in sectarian schools, noting that the textbooks involved were not religious books but books relating to secular subjects. Again, in Cochran, the Court refused to hold that, because an insti- tution was under religious auspices, its educational program could not receive governmental aid proportioned to the public function which such program involved. The Court was able clearly to distinguish the 4° Id. at 298. 41 Id. at 297. 42 281 U.S. 370 (1930). ~ Id. at 374. 416 PAGENO="0361" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1183 public aspect of parochial school education from its private (religious) aspect and held, in effect, that whatever benefit might accrue to the institution from the aid given, such was incidental to the public benefit conferred upon the citizen-pupil and therefore constitutionally without significance. Per Hughes, C.J., the Court stated: The schools, however, are not the beneficiaries of these appropriations. They obtain nothing from them, nor are they relieved of a single obligation because of them. The school children and the state alone are beneficiaries . . . . The legislation does not segregate private schools or their pupils, as its beneficiaries, or attempt to interfere with any matters of exclusively private concern. Its interest is education, broadily; its methods comprehensive. Individual interests are aided only as the common interest is safeguarded.44 It is true that at the time of the Cochran decision the Supreme Court had not specifically held the first amendment applicable to the states through the fourteenth amendment.45 But the great point of the Cochran opinion is this: it establishes flatly that the teaching of secular subjects in a parochial school is the performance of a public function and that such program may therefore be governmentally aided. It was not until the Everson case, discussed infra, that the Court considered the impact of the first amendment on legislation which met the public purpose requirements of the fourteenth amendment. In Everson v. Board of Educ.,48 the Supreme Court held con- stitutional a New Jersey statute which provided that reimbursement to parents might be made out of public funds for transportation of their children to (inter alia) Catholic parochial schools on buses regularly used in the public transportation system. The decision was made in the face of first amendment objections to the New Jersey program which had been directly raised. As can be seen, this holding is directly relevant to the issues stated on pages 401 and 411 of this study. The underlying principle of the case is plain: government aid may be rendered to a citizen in furtherance of his obtaining education in a church-related school. Justice Black, for the majority, stated: It is undoubtedly true that by the New Jersey program children are helped to get to church schools. There is even the possibility that some of the children ~ Id. at 375. ~5 Eighty-five years previously the Court, in a case involving a claim of a denial by Louisiana of rights under the free exercise clause of the federal constitution, had held that "the Constitution makes no provision for protecting the citizens of the respective States in their religious liberties." Permoli v. Municipality No. 1 of the City of New Orleans, 3 How. (44 U.S.) 589, 609 (1845). 48 330 U.S. 1 (1947). 41T PAGENO="0362" 1184 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS might not be sent to the church schools if the parents were compelled to pay their children's bus fares out of their own pockets when transportation to a public school would have been paid for by the State.47 It is true that Justice Black, in the course of his opinion, then stated: The "establishment of religion" clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from Church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing reli- gious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect "a wall of separation between Church and State."48 For making this oft-quoted statement, Justice Black has been criticized as having gone well beyond the necessities of decision in essaying upon the supposed application of the No Establishment Clause to a number of cases not then before the Court. The statement, however, must be re- garded as more than dictum.4° It is, in fact, part of the rationale of the decision, and must be read in the light of the actual result of the case: school bus benefits at government expense to citizens, to enable them to acquire education in church-related schools. That is to say: con- formably with even so stringent an interpretation of the No Establish- ment Clause, secular education in church-related schools (and that was precisely and solely what was there involved) is supportable by govern- ment. Unfortunately, the next succeeding paragraph of the Black opinion is often omitted from the discussion of disestablishment problems, but it forms the inseparable complement to his foregoing statement, neces- sarily resolving the tension between the two concepts of No Establish- ment and free exercise, which concepts would otherwise become un- workable absolutes. Justice Black stated: We must consider the New Jersey statute in accordance with the foregoing ~ Id. at 17. 48 Id. at 15-16. ~ Justice Black, speaking for the Court this year in Torcaso v. Watkins, denies that the statement was dictum. 367 U.s. 488, 493-94 (1961). 4lS PAGENO="0363" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDT.CATION AMENDMENTS 1185 limitations imposed by the First Amendment. But we must not strike that state statute down if it is within the state's constitutional power even though it ap- proaches the verge of that power. New Jersey cannot consistently with the "establishment of religion" clause of the First Amendment contribute tax-raised funds to the support of an institution which teaches the tenets and faith of any church. On the other hand, other language of the amendment commands that New Jersey cannot hamper its citizens in the free exercise of their own religion. Consequently, it cannot exclude individual Catholics, Lutherans, Mohammedans, Baptists, Jews, Methodists, Non-believers, Presbyterians, or the members of any other faith, because of their faith or lack of it, from receiving the benefits of public welfare legislation. While we do not mean to intimate that a state could not provide transportation only to children attending public schools, we must be careful, in protecting the citizens of New Jersey against state-established churches, to be sure that we do not inadvertently prohibit New Jersey from extending its general state law benefits to all its citizens without regard to their religious belief.60 Everson thus teaches that aid rendered to a citizen in order to ob- tain state-prescribed education in a church-related school is not, in the constitutional sense, "aid to religion," or a "financing of religious groups," or "support of the religious function" (to borrow terms used by various objectants to aid to education in church-related schools). It is recogni- tion of the principle that government may assist all public service aspects of an educational enterprise.5' The decision, therefore, con- clusively establishes a logical and enlightened "social benefits" doctrine, weighing (in the best traditions of the Supreme Court) the social benefit52 conferred by government action, relatively to prohibited govern- ment action. To what subjects may these benefits extend? Justice Black, writing for the majority, said that they included also police and fire protection, connections for sewage disposal, public highways and sidewalks. He 50 Id. at 16. 51 Justice Frankfurter, a dissenting justice in Everson, commented upon its holding in his separate opinion in the Sunday Law Cases as follows: [T]his Court held in the Everson case that expenditure of public funds to assure that children attending every kind of school enjoy the relative security of buses, rather than being left to walk or hitchhike, is not an unconstitutional "establishment," even though such an expenditure may cause some children to go to parochial schools who would not otherwise have gone. The close division of the Court in Everson serves to show what nice questions are involved in applying to particular governmental action the proposition, undeniable in the abstract, that not every regulation some of whose practical effects may facilitate the observance of a religion by its adherents affronts the requirement of church-state separation. 336 U.S. at 467 (separate opinion). 52 See discussion at p. 433-34 infra of the many "social benefits" relating to education in church-related schools which already have the sanction of legislative constitutional precedent. 41 l) PAGENO="0364" 1186 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS said that cutting off these services would make it far more difficult for the school to operate and that it was no purpose of the first amendment to bring about such a result.53 He noted that such services were "in- disputably marked off from the religious function," but he did not clarify this point or what he meant by "the religious function."54 How- ever, at an earlier point in his opinion he explicitly recognized the full force of the Cochran case, discussed supra, saying: "It is much too late to argue that legislation intended to facilitate the opportunity of children to get a secular education serves no public purpose. Cochran v. Louisiana State Board of Education."55 It would therefore appear clear that Jus- tice Black did not include the education in secular subjects given in church-related schools within the term "religious function" which he employed. The careful avoidance by the majority of any rule which would preclude aid to church-related education so far as the secular subject training in such education is concerned is to be noted in the following oft-quoted section of the opinion: "No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion."56 The foregoing language excludes aid in support of (a) the teaching or practicing of religion ("religious activities," 330 U.S. at 18. ~ Similarly indistinct is the expression of the Vermont Supreme Court in Swart v. South Burlington Town School Dist., 122 Vt. 177, 167 A.2d 514 (1961), cert. denied sub nom. Anderson v. Swart, 366 U.S. 925 (1961). That court held violative of the first amendment the practice of school districts of making tuition payments to certain state-approved Catholic parochial high schools where the districts in question did not have public high schools. This practice was authorized by state statutes, which did not, however, state whether the tuition should be paid to the parent or to the child or to the school. The plaintiff taxpayer sought an injunction to restrain the continuance of payments to the schools. The court cited the Bra,dfield, Cochran, and Everson decisions. In the Swart case, although the court stressed that the high schools in question were an "integral part of the Catholic Church, this was also true in Cochran, which case the court professed to follow. Undoubtedly the real reason for the decision in Swart lay in the fact that the tuition payments, which were made di- rectly to the schools, were not in some manner apportioned to support of the nonreligious instruction given. This view finds support in the particularity with which the court noted that in Cochran none of the books furnished by the state was "expected to be adapted to religious instruction." Even so, Swart does not hold that tuition payments made to pupils or parents for use in obtaining in church-related schools a state-approved education would be unconstitutional. The court's extensive citation of the "citizen-benefit" cases points to the contrary. ~ 330 U.S. at 7. 66 Id. at 16. (Emphasis added.) 4~2() PAGENO="0365" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1187 "teach or practice religion"); (b) religious institutions as religious insti- tutions. As noted infra, the aid given in Everson did actually to an extent support religious institutions, but the majority appeared to be saying that such aid is constitutionally unobjectionable where arising as an incident to the conferring of a definite social benefit upon a citizen. Moreover, the allusion to "the religious function" found in the majority opinion is extremely indefinite. This merely said that cutting off police, fire and sewerage services-these being "so separate and so indisputably marked off from the religious function"-"would make it far more difficult for the schools to operate."57 This is plainly not a statement that fire, police, sewer (and transportation) services are the only aids to education (a) which are not part of "the religious function"; (b) which government may constitutionally supply in the case of education in church-related schools. It cannot readily be denied that the New Jersey program aided "the religious function," that is, helped the teaching of religion in Catholic schools to continue. Justice Rutledge, dissenting in Everson, was not able to distinguish between so-called "direct" and "indirect" benefits. He thought that what the majority had sanctioned was "aid" to religious institutions-modified by whatever adjective. This, in his view, (which is the view which lost in Everson) was unconstitutional. As Professor Paul G. Kauper has noted: But to distinguish on principle from this type of benefit ["fringe" or "auxiliary"] and the more substantial benefits that would accrue from subsidies to pay teachers' salaries or to provide educational facilities presents difficulties, par- ticularly when it is noted that in the Everson case the Court emphasized that the state imposed a duty on all parents to send their children to some school and that the parochial school in question met the secular educational standards fixed by the state. By hypothesis the school building and the instruction in secular courses also meet the state's requirements. When we add to this that education is appropriately a function of both government and religion, the question may well be raised whether the same considerations that govern the problems of bus transportation costs and text books, as well as the question of public grants to hospitals under religious auspices, do not point to the conclusion, whatever different conclusions may be reached under state constitutions, that the First Amendment, in conjunction with the Fourteenth, does not stand in the way of governmental assistance for parochial schools.58 Professor Kauper might also have noted the existence of such bene- fits to church-related education as tax exemptions. ~ Id. at 18. 58 Kauper, Frontiers of Constitutional Liberty 136 (1956). 4~1 PAGENO="0366" 1188 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS The rule of Everson v. Board of Eth.sc. is plainly this: (1) Gov- ernment may support the education of citizens in various ways. (2) "Education of citizens" may take place in church-related schools. (3) Government may not support a religion or church, as such, but so long as its program confers directly and substantially a benefit to citizen education, that program is constitutionally unobjectionable, although benefit is at the same time incidentally conferred upon a religion or a church. Bradfield, Cochran, and Everson are therefore decisions which not only do not constitute precedent against aid, as discussed herein; they -and especially Everson-are clear precedent for aid, as discussed here- in. And they are the only decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States which pronounce upon the financial aid-providing function of government in the sense raised by the questions herein presented.59 B. THE MCCOLLUM AND ZORACH DECISIONS The McCollum and Zorach decisions form the next grouping of cases here of interest. Perhaps the first thing to be noted about the two cases is that they did not involve any programs of financial aid-providing by government-no grants, no loans of money or property, no rebates, credits or reimbursements. That is to say, they are not in point with respect to any such programs save insofar as they may have involved the concept of "aid" in some far less tangible or nonmaterial sense or save insofar as they contained pronouncements upon the meaning of the first amendment relevant to the problems involved instanter. McCollum v. Board of Educ.°° involved an education program imposed by a local board of education in Illinois whereby pupils in the public schools were permitted to attend classes in religious instruction conducted during regular school hours upon the school premises by out- side teachers representing the various faiths. Pupils not attending these classes were required to utilize the periods involved in pursuing their regular nonreligious studies. The petitioner charged that the program violated the first and fourteenth amendments. The Court held the program unconstitutional, as "a utilization of the tax-established and tax- supported public school system to aid religious groups to spread their ~ Quick Bear v. Leupp, 210 U.S. 50 (1908), is not in point, because it dealt with tribal funds, not public funds. ~ 333 U.S. 203 (1948). 4±~ PAGENO="0367" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTTCATION AMENDMENTS 1189 faith."°' The Court stressed that the fact that the program was upon a nonpreferential basis did not relieve it from the force of first amendment objections;62 the state's tax-supported public schools could not con- stitutionally be used for the dissemination of religious doctrine. The state could not, without violating the first amendment, use its compulsory attendance machinery to provide religious classes for sectarian groups.63 This was the opinion of the Court. Justice Frankfurter concurred, offer- ing various grounds for objection to the school program which were not stated in that opinion. He was joined by Justices Jackson, Burton and Rutledge. Justice Reed wrote a lengthy dissent. The case, of course, is not in point with respect to programs of grants, loans, tax rebates, etc. What precedent value it may be considered to have with respect to the instant problem lies in analogy, but the factual analogy is at best remote. The case does present a re-emphasis of the statements of Justice Black in Everson respecting the scope of the No Establishment Clause, and supplies this as its ratio decidendi. This, coupled with Justice Black's three times employing the phrase "wall of separation between church and state," led many commentators to con- clude that the Court had now stated a doctrine of absolute separation of church and state and that the ground had now been judicially prepared for the liquidation of fruitful relationships between government and religion which had been the American experience of one hundred sixty years. These commentators were proved incorrect by the decision of the Supreme Court in 1951 in Zorach v. Clauson.64 Zorach, like McCollum, involved a "released time" program, the program considered in Zoracli, however, being one which took place off the school premises. As in McCollum, however, the student not partici- pating in the program was to remain in the classroom. As in McCollum, the administrative machinery of the public school system was employed in the running of the program. Here, as in McCollum, the program was attacked upon the basis of first-fourteenth amendment objections. The Supreme Court held the program constitutionally unobjectionable. So far as the problems presented for consideration by this study are concerned, there are two points especially to be noted with respect to the Zorach decision: (1) the case is not, upon its facts, in point with 61 Id. at 210. 62 Id. at 211. ~ Id. at 212. 64 343 U.s. 306 (1952). 4~ PAGENO="0368" 1190 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS respect to loans, grants, tax rebates, etc.; (2) the majority opinion, through its lengthy statement upon the first amendment, makes it clear beyond all question that the first amendment is not to be taken as a weapon for the liquidation of the salutary American tradition of govern- ment-religion relationships. It moreover makes clear that the phrase, "separation of church and state," is not to be taken in any absolute sense: The First Amendment . . . does not say that in every and all respects there shall be a separation of Church and State. Rather it studiously defines the manner, the specific ways, in which there shall be no concert or union or de- pendency one on the other. That is the common sense of the matter. Otherwise, the state and religion would be aliens to each other-hostile, suspicious, and even unfriendly. Churches could not be required to pay even property taxes. Munici- palities would not be permitted to render police or fire protection to religious groups. Policemen who helped parishioners into their places of worship would violate the Constitution. Prayers in our legislative halls; the appeals to the Almighty in the messages of the Chief Executive; the proclamations making Thanksgiving Day a holiday; "so help me God" in our courtroom oath-these and all other references to the Almighty that run through our laws, our public rituals, our ceremonies would be flouting the First Amendment. A fastidious atheist or agnostic could even object to the supplication with which the Court opens each session: "God save the United States and this Honorable Court."°5 Far from holding to absolutist concepts respecting a "wall of separa- tion," the Court further stated: We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being. When the state encourages religious instruction or cooperates with religious authorities by adjusting the schedule of public events to sectarian needs, it fol- lows the best of our traditions. For then it respects the religious nature of our people and accommodates the public service to their spiritual needs. To hold that it may not would be to find in the Constitution a requirement that the gov- ernment show a callous indifference to religious groups. That would be pre- ferring those who believe in no religion over those who do believe.66 The Court also suggested limits beyond which government might not go in cooperating with religion, stating that government may not (1) "finance religious groups," (2) "undertake religious instruction," (3) "blend secular and sectarian education," or (4) "use secular institutions to force one or some religion on any person."67 These points had already been stated in Everson, and here again it is plain that they cannot be 65 Id. at 312-13. 60 Id. at 313-14. 67 Id. at 314. 4~4 PAGENO="0369" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1191 asserted as constitutional blocks to such financial aid to education in church-related schools as is here under consideration. These do not in- volve the financing of religious groups but instead the financing of citizen education.°8 By providing support for such citizen education, government is in no sense undertaking religious instruction nor a blend- ing of that with secular education. Nor is it, of course, in any way utilizing secular institutions to force religion on anyone. In view of the decision in Zoracli v. Clauson, there has been much speculation as to whether the Court there virtually overruled the McCollum decision. The dissenting justices in Zoracli believed this to have been the case, Justice Black saying that he saw "no significant difference between the invalid Illinois system and that of New York here [in Zoracli] sustained."69 Justice Frankfurter stated that the principles accepted by the court in McCollum "are disregarded in reach- ing the result in this case,"7° while Justice Jackson said "the McCollum case has passed like a storm in a teacup."7' Constitutional scholars have made similar observations. Professor Kauper states: "One may well agree with the dissenters in Zorach that the majority decision in the Zorach case . . . amounted to an overruling of the McCollum case."72 Undoubtedly the correct view to be taken today of the McCollum de- cision is that which is plainly suggested by Chief Justice Warren speak- ing for the majority of the Court in McGowan v. Maryland.73 In that case the Chief Justice, in disposing of the "establishment" contentions there raised, referred to the McCollum case, stating its holding: Thus, in McCollum v. Board of Education, 333 U.s. 203, the Court held that the action of a board of education, permitting religious instruction during school hours in public school buildings and requiring those children who chose not to attend to remain in their classrooms, to be contrary to the "Establishment" Clause.74 68 See discussion of Everson at pp. 417-22 supra. ~ 343 U.S. at 316 (dissenting opinion). Subsequently Justice Black in Torcaso v. Wat- kins, 367 U.S. 488, 494 (1961), noted that the Court in Zorach had stated: "We follow the McCollum case." Undoubtedly this does not represent a change in Justice Black's views since in Torcaso he was addressing himself to the narrow question of the validity of a test oath. This was the context of his notation, which was immediately followed by his stating that nothing decided or written in Zorach would justify sustaining a test oath. 70 343 U.S. at 322-23. 71 Id. at 325. 72 Kauper, Frontiers of Constitutional Liberty 122 (1956). `~ 366 U.S. 420 (1961). ~` Id. at 442. 425 75-402 O-G7-pt. 2-.---24 PAGENO="0370" 1192 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS It is, of course, this precise holding of McCollum which today survives as the law of that case. Sweeping dicta in the case which justifiably gave rise to fears that the No Establishment Clause should be inter- preted to create cleavage, if not hostility, between government and religion were given strongly moderating limitation by the Court in Zorac/z. * * * * * It may be concluded from the McColluni and Zoracli decisions that (1) they do not constitute precedent against the kinds of possible aid to church-related education here under discussion; (2) the Court has specifically rejected the view that the Constitution requires an absolute separation of church and state and instead makes it clear that govern- ment and religion may in various ways cooperate. So far as an absolutist concept of the "separation" principle may be derived from the McCollum case, that concept is today constitutionally dead. By its broad and eminently practical view of the No Establishment Clause-a view which expressly recognizes governmental accommoda- tions to the religious interests of the people-the Zorac/.z case goes some distance to argue in favor of, rather than against, such governmental aid to education in church-related schools as is herein discussed. C. THE MEYER AND PIERCE DECISIONS Meyer v. Nebraska and Pierce v. Society of Sisters form the third relevant group of cases. They relate, in differing ways, to rights of free choice in selecting educational institutions. In a more profound sense they stand as constitutional barriers against the imposition by the state of an exclusive educational pattern aimed at creating an official Kultur. Meyer v. Nebraska75 involved a state statute which made it a crime for any teacher to teach any subject in any elementary school in any language other than English. Meyer, a teacher in a parochial school maintained by the Zion Evangelical Lutheran Congregation, was con- victed under the statute of teaching the reading in the German language of Bible stories to a child. The statute was enacted just after the close of World War I, and it recited the existence of an emergency. The Supreme Court of Nebraska in upholding the conviction, considered that to have children become acquainted with any foreign language was ~ 262 U.S. 390 (1923). 4~6 PAGENO="0371" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS 1193 "inimical to our own safety." The requirements of the statute the court therefore upheld as a reasonable exercise of the police power. The Su- preme Court of the United States reversed, holding that the statute as applied violated the rights of the teacher guaranteed by the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment. In arriving at its conclusion the Court stressed the importance of education in America, adverting, in relation thereto, to the Ordinance of 1787. It found, however, no harm in mere knowledge of the German language. It then went on to describe three groups of rights which it declared the Constitution protected against unreasonable intrusions by the state: the right of the teacher, the right of the parent, the right of the child. Of the statute the Court then said: Evidently the legislature has attempted materially to interfere with the calling of modern language teachers, with the opportunities of pupils to acquire knowl- edge, and with the power of parents to control the education of their young.76 Thus the Court struck at a doctrine which is everywhere identified with modern totalitarian regimes and which unhappily is on the ascend- ancy in the United States: the view that all educational rights are the possession of the state.77 The Court here forcefully pointed out the exist- ence of rights in other groups. While conceding that "the state may do much, go very far, indeed in order to improve the quality of its citizens, physically, mentally, and morally," yet, it insisted "the individual has certain fundamental rights which must be respected." The Court stated moreover: "The desire of the legislature to foster a homogeneous people with American ideals . . . is easy to appreciate. ~ But it warned that the means adopted could not be means violative of the liberty guaranteed by the Constitution. Meyer has great significance with respect to the questions to which this study addresses itself. It is more and more insistently argued that only one form of education is really entitled to exist in the United States; 76 Id. at 401. (Emphasis added.) ~ Indeed the Court with great accuracy detailed the relationship between complete state absorption of education and the marking of the totalitarian society, referring to the pro- posals of Plato that the state take the young for their upbringing, totally isolating them from their parents. The Court remarked: "In order to submerge the individual and develop ideal citizens, Sparta assembled the males at seven into barracks and intrusted their sub- sequent education and training to official guardians. . . . [lit will hardly be affirmed that any legislature could impose such restrictions upon the people of a state without doing great violence to both letter and spirit of the Constitution." Id. at 402. 78 Id. at 401-02. 4~7 PAGENO="0372" 1194 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS that, apart from constitutional considerations, education in church-re- lated schools has no claim to governmental support because-though it teaches what the state requires-it also teaches religion. It thus lacks the all-important character of complete "officialness" and is a force contributing to cultural heterogeneity, diversity, pluralism. So far as it is part of the argument against aid to education in church- related schools that we should have but a single, state-run, uniformitarian system of education in the United States, the Supreme Court in Meyer v. Nebraska warned that homogeneity is not to be attained at the sacri- fice of basic teacher, parental and child rights. It also gave warning- highly significant in view of cries for uniformity based upon Russian achievements-that the ipvocation of "emergencies" does not command the ouster of such basic rights. The landmark decision in Pierce v. Society of Sisters79 involved an expanded recognition of parental and child rights in education.8° It involved an even more positive rejection of statism in education than had been made by the Supreme Court in the Meyer case. As in Meyer, there was involved a statute aimed at creating a uniformitarian scheme of education, but whereas Meyer concerned the question of whether the state has absolute power to prescribe curriculum, Pierce concerned the question of whether the state has a monopoly over education itself. The teaching of the Pierce case is of central importance with respect to issues presented for discussion in this study. A statute of the state of Oregon required every parent or other person having custody of a child between eight and sixteen years of age to send such child to a public school. Failure to comply was made a misdemeanor. The statute was the result of a campaign to "Americanize" education in Oregon launched in 1920 by the Imperial Council, A.A.O. Nobles Mystic Shrine and certain related groups. Their purpose was stated on the official ballot when the compulsory education bill was before the electorate. The sentences are instructive at the present hour: Our nation supports the public school for the sole purpose of preservation. The assimilation and education of our foreign-born citizens in the principles of our government, the hopes and inspiration of our people, are best secured by and through attendance of all children in our public schools. ~ 268 U.s. 510 (1925). 80 The right is in the parent until the child is emandpated; the right is otherwise in the child. The Pierce decision, in defining parenta' rights, stressed protection of the child, and by necessary implication, his right to be educated in nonstate institutions. Id. at 535. 4~S PAGENO="0373" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDITCATION AMENDMENTS 1195 We must now halt those coming to our country from forming groups, establish- ing schools, and thereby bringing up their children in an environment often antagonistic to the principles of our government. Mix the children of the foreign-born with the native-born, and the rich with the poor. Mix those with prejudices in the public school melting pot for a few years while their minds are plastic, and finally bring out the finished product-a true American.81 The "Americanization" campaign swept the state and the measure became law. The Hill Military Academy and the Society of Sisters sought injunctions restraining enforcement of the statute, alleging its uncon- stitutionality. Ranged on the side of the Society of Sisters and Hill Military Academy were the Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America, the North Pacific Union Conference of Seventh-Day Adventists, the Evan- gelical Lutheran Synod of Missouri and Ohio, twenty-five ministers of the Presbyterian Church, the Catholic Civil Rights Association of Oregon, and the American Jewish Committee. The Protestant Episcopal brief amicus curiae saw the state monopoly over education created by the statute as "threatening the whole struc- ture of religious education and morality." The Seventh-Day Adventist brief amicus curiae saw the statute as breaching "the common law, or natural right" of the parent "to direct the education of the child" and: The natural rights of the parent for which we contend in this case preceded the state, and the government, formed to "secure these" certainly ought not to take any action which would subvert the very purpose of its creation.82 The most extensive and learned brief amicus curiae to be filed in the case was that written by Louis Marshall on behalf of the American Jewish Committee. He expressed his fears as to what the practical re- sults might be of state absorption of all education: Recognizing in the main the great merit of our public schools system, it is nevertheless unthinkable that public schools alone shall, by legislative compul- sion rather than by their own merits, be made the only medium of education in this country. Such a policy would speedily lead to their deterioration. The absence of the right of selection would at once lower the standards of education. If the children of the country are to be educated in accordance with an undeviat- ing rule of uniformity and by a single method, then eventually our nation would consist of mechanical Robots and standardized Babbitts.83 81 Oregon School Cases: Complete Record 732 (1925). 82 Id. at 594. 83 Id. at 615. 4~9 PAGENO="0374" 1196 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTCATION AMENDMENTS Against the slander-similar to that heard today-that parochial and private schools are somehow "un-American," the American Jewish Com- mittee brief stated: There is no foundation in truth for this statement. The private and parochial schools which exist throughout the country are conducted on the same patriotic lines as are our public schools.84 Moreover: Among the advantages of private and parochial schools is the fact that there prejudices are apt to be mitigated. At all events they are not stimulated in a truly religious atmosphe~e or in a genuine cultural environment.~ Marshall inveighed against the exponents of uniformitarian education: All of these statements combined lead to the conclusion in the minds of those re- sponsible for this species of argumentation, that by the education of the youth of the nation in our public schools "all shall stand upon one common level." By that doubtless is meant the dead level of uniformity. God forbid that that shall be the case!86 But the most trenchant criticism of the statute and of the philosophy of those who defended it Marshall reserved for the conclusion of his brief. The point is most pertinent in view of charges made today that church-related schools are "divisive." Backers of the statute had stated: "Our children must not under any pretext, be it based upon money, creed or social status, be divided into antagonistic groups, cliques or cults there to absorb the narrow views of life as they are taught."87 This view Marshall castigated: Here those who send their children to private and parochial schools because of their creed are charged with constituting antagonistic groups and as absorbing `narrow views of life.' In other words, parents who are anxious for the future welfare and happiness of their children, and who seek to dedicate them to moral, ethical and religious principles, are denounced for sending their children to private and parochial schools, because, forsooth, the views of life which they there absorb are characterized as `narrow'. What does that mean but an attempt on the part of the protagonists for this law to sit in judgment upon their fellow-citizens whose ideals differ from theirs? How does such a mental attitude differ from that which prevailed when governments sought to enforce uniformity of religious beliefs and punished nonconformists as criminals?88 84 Id. at 618. 86 Id. at 619. 86 Id. at 620. 87 Id. at 621. (Emphasis added.) 88 Id. at 621-22. 430 PAGENO="0375" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATJOX AMENDMENTS 1197 The Supreme Court of the United States affirmed the decrees of the lower court enjoining enforcement of the statute. Its basis for affirmance was that the statute deprived plaintiffs of liberty and property con- trary to the guarantees of the fourteenth amendment. The Court noted that the District Court of the United States for the District of Oregon had ruled that the statute interfered with the schools' "free choice of patrons" and that "parents and guardians, as part of their liberty, might direct the education of children by selecting reputable teachers and places."89 The Supreme Court further stated (with respect to schools operated by the Catholic Church): "The Compulsory Education Act of 1922 has already caused the withdrawal from its schools of children who would otherwise continue, and their income has steadily declined."90 Acknowledging the power of the state reasonably to regulate all schools, the Court noted that the district court had declared that private schools in question "were not unfit or harmful to the public."9' The Supreme Court concluded that, under the doctrine of Meyer v. Nebraska it was "entirely plain that the Act of 1922 unreasonably inter- feres with the liberty of parents and guardians to direct the upbringing and education of children under their control."°2 The Court then stated, in effect, that it is not within the competency of the legislature to vest in the state a monopoly of education: "As often heretofore pointed out, rights guaranteed by the Constitution may not be abridged by legislation which has no reasonable relation to some purpose within the competency of the state."°3 The Court was, of course, stating that the Compulsory Education Act of 1922, creating the state educational monopoly, did not bear reasonable relationship to a purpose which was within the state's competency. Again stressing the parental rights and sharply attacking that con- cept of governmental power which would result in subjecting all to a single educational mold, the Court stated: The fundamental theory of liberty upon which all governments in this Union repose excludes any general power of the state to standardize its children by forcing them to accept instruction from public teachers only. The child is not the mere creature of the state; those who nurture him and direct his destiny 89 268 U.S. at 533-34. 9° Id. at 534. 91 Ibid. 92 Ibid. ~ Id. at 535. (Emphasis added.) 131 PAGENO="0376" 1198 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.94 The teachings of Pierce are of importance with respect to the issues here presented. First, Pierce holds that there is no power in the state to monopolize education. Secondly, Pierce states that the child is not a mere creature of the state. Thirdly, Pierce holds that parents may, in the discharge of their duty under state compulsory education laws, send their children to church-related schools rather than to public schools if the church-related schools meet the secular educational re- quirements which the state has constitutional power to impose.95 This is described by the Court as a rig/it-not a privilege but a part of that "liberty" protected under the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment (and also undeniably of the fifth amendment).96 This becomes a consideration to be weighed where a program of governmental spending upon education in public schools may reach such proportions as to require the cessation of all other kinds of education in the land and de facto to remove all possibility of the exercise of the parental right of choice. The Pierce decision has received subsequent recognition by members of the Supreme Court as having established protection to parents and to children under the free exercise clause of the first amendment. Justice Rutledge so recognized it in his dissenting opinion in the Everson case,97 and Justice Frankfurter in his concurring opinion in the Sunday Law Cases, in which Justice Harlan joined.98 Certain essential theses of the Pierce decision find subsequent ex- pression in the racial desegregation cases.99 Here, an "official" plan of free education for Negro children was prescribed by the state. These children felt themselves, however, constitutionally entitled to receive their schooling in institutions which were "unofficial" as to them. The Supreme Court, by the fact of its decision in Brown, inferentially denied any supposedly supreme power in the states to require attendance at "official" schools. Moreover, there appears in the Brown opinion (by a ~ Id. at 534. (Emphasis added.) °~ Specific recognition of this was given in the opinion of the Court in Everson v. Board of Educ., 330 U.S. 1, 18 (1947). And see similar recognition by the Court in Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158, 166 (1943). 96 See Boiling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497 (1954). ~ 330 U.S. at 32-33. 98 McGowan v. Maryland, 366 U.S. 420, 467 (1961) (separate opinion). ~ Brown v. Board of Educ., 347 U.S. 483 (1954). 432 PAGENO="0377" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1199 unanimous Court) strong emphasis upon certain human and personal values-an emphasis which is the antithesis of statism. It spoke of education as "awakening the child to cultural values"; it spoke of the personal success of the child in life.'00 Above all, it rejected the notion that adequate state-provided plant, teachers' salaries and curriculum went to make a real education where human personality-the "hearts and minds" of which the Court spoke-would be adversely affected.'°' In its opinion the Court even went to the length of citing materials from the field of psychology in order to buttress its position that values of person- ality and related rights of conscience take precedence over "official" government programs of education, however competent these may be.'°2 The Meyer and Pierce cases underscore the protection with which the American Constitution jealously surrounds individual rights in educa- tion. They both stress child-parental rights; by clear implication they attack the concept of a statist culture which would result from the permitting of government monopoly of education. Each gives strong basis for argument that governmental programs which result in denials to parents and children of choice in education according to the reason- able demands of conscience may be unconstitutional. 3. Legislation as Constitutional Precedent `While constitutional doctrines of judicial review vest in the judiciary the power ultimately to determine validity, the duty upon the legisla- tive and executive branches to assess and to pass upon constitutionality is by no means on that account removed. Indeed, the doctrine of the presumed constitutionality of legislation rests upon the presumed scrupulous pursuit of that duty by the legislature. No stronger answer is to be found to the argument that no aid may be afforded education in church-related schools than the fact that the Congress has in numerous ways over the years deliberately provided such aid. A list of forty-one such programs-all, by the way, consisting of grants and loans to church-related institutions (including educational institutions)-was issued on March 28, 1961, by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.'03 One of these programs, the Surplus 100 Id. at 493. 101 Id. at 493-94. 102 Id. at 494 n.h. 103 Senate Comm. on Labor and Public Welfare, Constitutionality of Federal Aid to Education in Its Various Aspects, S. Doc. No. 29, 87th Cong., 1st Sess. 37 (1961). 433 PAGENO="0378" 1200 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Property Act of 1944, has resulted in 488 grants of land and buildings to religious-affiliated schools belonging to thirty-five different denomina- tions.104 4. Some Permissible Forms of Aid The wide variety of legislative precedents reveals that Congress has used many forms of aid to education in order to promote national ex- cellence. Grants, loans, scholarships, tuition payments, and tax benefits have been among the forms used. Frequently, church-related institu- tions have been included on the same footing as other accredited schools and colleges. Familiar examples are the College Housing Act,'°5 the Surplus Property Act,'°6 and the G.I. Bill of Rights.'°7 Only very re- cently has it been suggested that the only permissible form of participa- tion by church-related organizations should be through the medium of loans-with, indeed, a further limitation, now urged in some quarters, that these loans be limited to a few purposes connected, in the main, with the national defense.'°8 The form of aid is important only insofar as it embodies a concrete limitation of governmental support to the public aspects of education in private nonprofit schools. As previously indicated, this study is not concerned with the constitutionality of government programs whose primary purpose and effect would be the support of the religious aspects of education in church-related schools. How, then, can a meaningful financial division be made between those costs properly attributable to the secular aspects of education and those properly attributable to the religious aspects? Such a division is properly the task of the art of accounting, as in- formed by the basic legal and educational principles applicable in this area. Some of the costs in the construction and operation of a church- related school are obviously the same as costs in providing public schools; some are obviously different; and still others are similar but not identical. The basic principle which must govern here is that if government support is to be limited to the secular aspects of education in church-related schools, then government support must be directed 104 See 107 Cong. Rec. 17351 (daily ed. Sept. 7, 1961). 105 64 Stat. 77 (1950), as amended, 12 U.S.C. § 1749 (1958). 106 58 Stat. 765 (1944), as amended, 40 U.S.C. § 484(j) and (k) (1958). 107 66 Stat. 663 (1952), 38 U.S.C. § 911(6) (1952). The same provision was enacted in the Korean Veterans Bill of Rights, 72 Stat. 1174, 38 U.S.C. § 1601(6) (Supp. 1958). 108 See Annex B at pp. 445-55 infra for analysis of a memorandum of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare which defends this limitation. 434 PAGENO="0379" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1201 towards the neutral items of expense: those expenses which are sub- stantially the same in public and nonpublic schools. A corollary of this principle is that government should not bear the complete cost of con- structing and operating nonpublic schools. Keeping the government's contribution to a limited basis means that some allocation of costs will certainly have been made. So long as the government's share is directed towards the neutral expenditures, government will not be involved in the purposeful support of religion. As already indicated in the discus- sion of the major Supreme Court decisions, the indirect benefit or detri- ment which may accrue to church-related institutions from such a governmental program is not forbidden by the first amendment because important national interests in education are at stake.109 Fundamental to the entire discussion of the allocation of costs is the principle that when both governmental and nongovernmental institutions contribute to the cost of a program, the government has no right to insist on more than the achievement of the national purposes which the government intends to promote by making the expenditures. If those purposes are achieved, the nonpublic institution is constitutionally free and financially entitled to use its own funds for its own purposes. Con- sequently, if the government makes a grant of funds or equipment for national purposes to a church-related school, and this grant represents only a fraction of the cost of the operation of that school, all that government is entitled to insist upon is that the purposes for which the grant was made be in fact accomplished. It has no right to require the school to abstain from the accomplishment of other and compatible purposes through the use of the school's own funds. If this principle of allocation is extended to particular items, there is still less justification for excluding the accomplishment of compatible private purposes. For example, if the government contributes only part of a classroom, it is manifestly not entitled to the entire use of the classroom. The mutuality of financial interest and the compatibility of the public and private purposes precludes any exclusivity of the government's interest. ~ The point is stressed by Justice Frankfurter in his separate opinion in the Sunday Law Cases. Commenting upon the meaning of the No Establishment Clause, he stated the limitation of its reach: "Neither the National Government nor, under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, a state, may, by any device, support belief or the expression of belief for its own sake -the words, "for its own sake," being evidently employed to describe a primary benefit to religion. McGowan v. Maryland, 366 U.S. 420, 466 (1961). 43:) PAGENO="0380" 1202 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS In the case of loans, where the borrower bears the entire cost of the facility, it is particularly clear that government is without authority to require the banishment of the religious aspects of education. The national purpose is satisfied when the students learn what the govern- ment reasonably requires them to learn. It is not frustrated when they also learn their religious heritage. Scholarships, based on merit and need, have been a frequent instru- ment for promoting educational excellence by the national and state governments. They exist on both the college and the high school level. Significantly, scholarship programs have carefully respected the student's and parents' freedom to choose any accredited educational institution and to study any subjects offered in that institution. No better example of the extravagant extremes to which some factions wish to push the separation of church and state can be found than in the attempts dur- ing the last Congress to limit the freedom of choice of scholarship winners both as to the institutions attended and the subjects studied. Religion, it would seem, is no longer a part of human culture. Tuition grants differ from scholarships in being based not on merit but on some obligation of the government to provide education. At the state level, some state constitutions have limited tuition payments to public and nonsectarian schools."° At the federal level, the situation is quite different. Page boys in Congress and the Supreme Court receive tuition grants from the federal government which may be applied either to a public or any private school.'1' If Congress may give this freedom of choice to federal employees, it is difficult to see why Congress may not extend it to federal taxpayers. It would be a paradox, indeed, were the separation of church and state to mean that scholarship winners or federal employees may attend church-related schools, but that no one else may. ilO Cf. Almond v. Day, 197 Va. 419, 89 S.E.2d 851 (1955); Swart v. South Burlington Town School Dist., 122 Vt. 177, 167 A.2d 514 (1961), cert. denied sub nom. Anderson v. Swart, 366 U.S. 925 (1961). In these cases both courts found a prohibition of tuition payments to sectarian schools in both the federal and the local constitutions. In this connection, it should be carefully noted that most state cases invalidating state aid to educa- tion in church-related schools have been decided not on the first and fourteenth amendments, but on far more restrictive and specific prohibitions in the local constitutions. See, e.g., Matthews v. Quinton, 362 P.2d 932 (Alaska 1961), appeal docketed, Misc. Docket No. 762, U.s. Sup. Ct., Nov. 25, 1961; Dickman v. School Dist. No. 620, Ore. Sup. Ct., Nov. 14, 1961. Matthews involved bus transportation; Dickman dealt with textbooks. 111 60 Stat. ~839 (1946), 2 U.S.C. § 88(a) (1958). 436 PAGENO="0381" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1203 Tax benefits are in the unique position of having been almost uni- versally accorded since the foundation of the country by both the state and the federal governments to all nonprofit educational institutions, church-related as well as nondenominational and public. If history means anything, such a tradition cannot be unconstitutional.'12 Long-term loans, matching grants, scholarships, tuition payments, and tax benefits are only some of the possible forms of aid to education. Others will doubtless be conceived. What is important here is not a complete catalog, but the conclusion that the major forms of aid in current discussion are constitutional as applied to education in church- related schools. The form is important only as it safeguards the national purpose. CONCLUSIONS From the foregoing certain conclusions may be clearly drawn: 1. Education in church-related schools is a public function which, by its nature, is deserving of governmental support. 2. There exists no constitutional bar to aid to education in church- related schools in a degree proportionate to the value of the public function it performs. Such aid to the secular function may take the form of matching grants or long-term loans to institutions, or of scholar- ships, tuition payments or tax benefits. 3. The parent and child have a constitutional right to choose a church-related educational institution meeting reasonable state require- ments as the institution in which the child's education shall be acquired. 4. Government in the United States is without power to impose upon the people a single educational system in which all must participate. The foregoing conclusions, drawn from the relevant Supreme Court decisions, represent only a part of the justification for aid to education in church-related schools. What must further be considered are results which would flow from a denial of such aid in the face of long-term programs of massive support exclusively to the public schools. Some of these results would raise serious constitutional problems, while others would render meaningless certain constitutional protections presently enjoyed. These results should be carefully pondered when any program of major federal aid to education is being considered, because they would plainly entail a transformation of a free and pluralist Amen- 112 Cf. Heisy v. County of Alameda, 46 Cal. 2d 644, 298 P.2d 1, cert. denied, 352 U.S. 921 (1956). 43.;. PAGENO="0382" 1204 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS can society into a society in which uniformitarianism would be certain and freedom therefore doubtful. It is indeed true that governmental spending may effect transformations of society; and in no instance is this potential in government spending programs to be more carefully examined than where such programs are directed-as in the case of subsidies for education-toward the formation of the minds of citizens. Massive spending solely for public schools would in time result in a critical weakening of church-related schools, presaging the ultimate closing of many of them. This, taken in conjunction with the compul- sory attendance laws, would mean that most children would be forced to acquire their education in the public schools. De facto, parents would no longer enjoy the freedom to send their children to church-related schools. Practically speaking, therefore, the freedom of parent and child protected by the Pierce decision would have been rendered meaningless 113 Further difficulties appear. The Supreme Court observed in West Virginia State Bd. of Educ. v. Barnette: "If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion or other matters of opinion ."~ Yet an "orthodoxy" is expressed- inescapably so-even in a curriculum from which religious "orthodoxies" are absent. Removal, through government spending programs, of prac- tical alternatives115 to public school education would mean that those 113 Although economic coercion through governmental action is not to be classified, constitutionally speaking, with statutory coercion such as was considered in the Pierce case, the observation made in 1955 by Alanson W. Willcox, presently General Counsel of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, should be borne carefully in mind: "Whenever a state imposes a choice between . . . receiving a public benefit, on the one hand, and exercising one's constitutional freedoms, on the other, the state burdens each course to the extent that abandonment of the other is unpalatable. The deterrent to exercise of first amendment freedoms when public benefits are at stake is a real one Infringement of constitutional rights is nonetheless infringement because accomplished through a conditioning of a privilege." 41 Cornell L.Q. 12, 43-44 (1955). 114 319 U.S. 624, 642 (1943). 115 The Supreme Court has made note of the absence of alternatives as a standard for judging the coercive effect of given governmental action. The Court pointed out that in the .11 cColluin case "the only alternative available to the nonattending students was to remain in their classrooms"; while with respect to the Maryland Sunday laws (which the Court upheld) "the alternatives open to nonlaboring persons . . . are far more diverse." McGowan v. Maryland, 366 U.S. 420, 452 (1961). The absence (in the case of closing of church-related schools, caused by a program of massive governmental support of public schools) of any alternative opportunity to receive a form of education to which 43~ PAGENO="0383" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1205 who, in conscience, desired education in a church-related school would be forced to participate in an education in unacceptable orthodoxies. Here, as a matter of practicality, would be the social result discounte- nanced by the Court in McCollum: coercion upon the child to partici- pate in schooling, the orientation of which was counter to his beliefs- a de facto denial of free exercise of religion."6 Not only "free exercise" problems would be encountered by such spending programs; "no establishment" problems would become mani- fest. This is because there is little guarantee that the public schools can, in actuality, maintain a completely non-"value"-inculcating pro- gram. Since life itself, humanity, history, and the social sciences are all involved in the daily life of any educational institution, "values" of one sort or another inevitably creep in. In this connection, it must be asked: Tithe No Establishment Clause operates to exclude the in- culcation of religion in the public schools, what, by constitutional defi- nition, is "religion"? Leo Pfeffer, of the American Jewish Congress, considers nontheistic beliefs to be "religious": In this study I shall regard humanism as a religion along with the three major faiths: Protestantism, Catholicism, and Judaism. This, I submit, is not an unreasonable inclusion. Ethical Culture is exclusively humanist but is gen- erally considered a religion."7 Lanier Hunt, of the National Council of Churches, is somewhat un- certain of the definition of religion, but is willing to accord it a very broad definition: By another definition, religion is simply loyalty to ultimate values. . . . In schools, youths look for answers to questions about the origin, destiny, and meaning of life. These are religious questions. In the United States we say that every individual has a right to an education. And this is an expression of a religious conviction about the nature of the universe and man's place in it. Within the wider definition of religion, public education is perhaps the greatest religious force in American life today.118 millions of citizens would consider themselves conscientiously entitled, would highlight the coercive effect of such a program. 116 The Court continues to underscore its warnings against such uses of governmental power as will tend to coerce beliefs. Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488 (1961). 117 Pfeffer, Creeds in Competition 5 (1958). 118 Hunt, Religion and Education, 332 Annals of the Am. Academy of Political Science 99 (1960). 4~ PAGENO="0384" 1206 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Justice Black's notation in Torcaso v. Watkins is to the same effect: Among religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Cul- ture, Secular Humanism, and others.119 That public schools inculcate values is undeniable. Indeed, it has been said, respecting public school education: The development of moral and spiritual values is basic to all other educational objectives. Education uninspired by moral and spiritual values is direction- less . That educational purposes rest on moral and spiritual values has been generally recognized in the public school system. The Educational Policies Commission has previously declared: "Every statement of educational purposes, including this one, depends upon the judgment of some person or group as to what is good and what is bad, what is true and what is false, what is ugly and what is beauti- ful, what is valuable and what is worthless, in the conduct of human affairs."2° The foregoing statement by the Educational Policies Commission of the National Education Association of the United States and the Ameri- can Association of School Administrators is qualified, it is true, by the statement contained in the same report that public schools must be nondenominational: "As public institutions, the public schools of this nation must be non-denominational. They can have no part in securing acceptance of any one of the numerous systems of belief regarding a supernatural power and the relation of mankind thereto."2' However, several of the denominations to which Justice Black made reference do not acknowledge a supernatural power. The value-objectives of one of these, the Ethical Culture Movement, are described in the following statement: A national movement of Ethical (Culture) Societies-religious and educational fellowships based on ethics, believing in the worth, dignity and fine potentialities of the individual, encouraging freedom of thought, committed to the democratic ideal and method, issuing in social action.'22 Certainly the Court, through Justice Black, cannot have meant to say that the teaching of certain religious value-systems to child citizens is publicly supportable, whereas the teaching of certain others is not. To make a distinction based upon whether the religious value-system em- 119 367 U.s. 488, 495 nil (1961). 120 NEA & AASA, Moral and Spiritual Values in the Public Schools 7 (1951). 121 Id. at 4. 122 1961 Yearbook of American Churches 47 (1961). 44() PAGENO="0385" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDIJCATION AMENDMENTS 1207 braced the supernatural would be meaningless and invidious. The Court, in Torcaso, held the provision of the Maryland Constitution there involved unconstitutional because it favored "one particular sort of believers" ("believers," as the Court had noted, including also those who pro less nontheistic religions) ~123 Obviously, under an absolutist interpretation of the first amendment, such value-inculcation must pose serious problems. Again, however, rationality should point to the solution. Value-teaching should not, in principle, be regarded as an evil, to be shouldered out of community life by some deemed necessities of the first amendment. But if such teach- ing may, without first amendment objection, be offered in the public schools which are supported completely by government, then it cannot be said that some compulsive mandate of the first amendment decrees that no government aid whatever can be granted to education in church- related schools because the church-related schools, too, offer a program which inculcates values. Again, it should be apparent that there is no need for a dilemma seemingly caused by opposed claims of the free exercise clause, on the one hand, and the No Establishment Clause on the other. It is apparcnt that the free exercise clause as well as the No Establishment Clause must be recognized as creating limitations upon the spending power of the federal government. If all governmental spending for education in church-related schools is to be considered ruled out on account of requirements of the No Establishment Clause, governmental spending for education in public schools must also be considered ruled out due to requirements of the free exercise clause. Ours, however, is a Consti- tution of rationality, not one of absolutes which paralyze social action. And plainly the solution becomes one in which government should be free to make such rational adjustment as best comports with the very real social needs involved. Apart from the question of precise holdings in cases, constitutional precedent of another sort is available in aid of a solution to the prob- lem here presented: the view often expressed in the more recent Supreme Court decisions respecting freedom of contract, the commerce clause, due process in criminal proceedings, and equal protection, that the Con- stitution is not static but must be from time to time reinterpreted in view of changed social conditions.124 These decisions show a hospitality 123 367 U.S. at 490. 124 Emspak v. United States, 349 U.S. 190 (1955); Brown v. Board of Educ., 347 441 75-402 O-G7-pt. 2-25 PAGENO="0386" 1208 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS to change, an awareness of widely felt social needs, an admirable balanc- ing of competing interests, and a recognition that the demands of justice are not necessarily met by such slogans as "freedom of contract," or "separate but equal"-or "separation of church and state" (where that phrase is meant to denominate absolute separation). Such pat phrases may command constitutional results while ousting rational discussion of the real and complex social problems involved. In the present situation, where it is said that an educational crisis is upon us and that government aid to education is an imperative, it is apparent that the constitutional wisdom of the past is the necessity of the present. There is need to recognize the public contribution of edu- cation in church-related schools and to continue to utilize its beneficent contribution to the national weal. The problems involved are pre- dominantly practical: no constitutional bar exists to the aid herein described to education in church-related schools. Practicalities, not slogans, should govern the determinations to be made-determinations which give clear recognition to the rights of parents, the rights of chil- dren, the enlargement of freedom, and the preservation of the nation. U.S. 483 (1954); Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942); Home Bldg. & Loan Ass'n v. Blaisdell, 290 U.s. 398 (1934). 44~ PAGENO="0387" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDuCATION AMENDMENTS 1209 ANNEX A STATISTICS ON ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOL ENROLLMENT IN THE UNITED STATES (1960) Column 1: Total students enrolled in all elementary and secondary schools, public and nonpublic.125 Column 2: Total students enrolled in Catholic elementary and secondary schools.126 Column 3: Catholic school enrollment as per cent of total enrollment (Column 2 divided by Column 1) STATE Column 1 TOTAL Column 2 CATHOLIC Column 3 CATHOLIC! TOTAL Alabama 816,117 24,530 3.01% Alaska 45,558 2,252 4.93% Arizona 333,887 22,746 6.81% Arkansas 433,325 10,150 2.34% California 3,698,762 313,784 8.48% Colorado 430,023 34,369 7.99% Connecticut 573,331 84,416 14.72% Delaware 102,604 18,544 18.04% District of Columbia 143,214 19,787 13.82% Florida 1,038,381 53,833 5.18% Georgia 949,864 16,659 1.75% Hawaii 161,841 15,590 9.63% Idaho 166,440 6,838 4.11% Illinois 2,274,666 484,506 21.30% Indiana 1,125,367 128,942 11.46% Iowa 672,855 86,473 12.85% Kansas 516,083 46,439 9.00% Kentucky 707,746 81,402 11.50% Louisiana 847,164 121,058 14.29% 125 Column 1 is an estimate derived from the addition of three figures: (1) public school enrollment as given in Office of Education Circular No. 634, Fall 1960 Statistics on Enrollment, Teachers, and Schoolhousing in Full Time Public Elementary and Secon- dary Day Schools, Table 3 (August 4, 1961); (2) Catholic elementary and secondary school enrollment as given in the General Summary of The Official Catholic Directory (1961); and (3) 10% of the Catholic enrollment as an estimate of the non-Catholic private elementary and secondary school enrollment. This 10% factor is based on the estimate in Biennial Survey of Education in the United Statcs-1954-56: Statistics of State School Systems 1955-56, at 25-26 (1959). 126 The totals given in Column 2 have been derived by adding the enrollments in four categories of the General Summary of The Official Catholic Directory (1961): High Schools, Diocesan and Parochial; High Schools, Private; Elementary Schools, Parochial and Institutional; Elementary Schools, Private. 44:~ PAGENO="0388" 1210 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Column 3 Column 1 Column 2 CATROLIC/ STATE TOTAL CATHOLIC TOTAL Maine 234,597 27,104 11.55% Maryland 727,489 109,205 15.01% Massachusetts 1,072,240 234,414 21.90% Michigan 1,997,376 287,851 14.41% Minnesota 850,684 143,953 16.92% Mississippi 590,599 14,181 2.40% Missouri 984,156 145,237 14.76% Montana 166,480 18,332 11.01% Nebraska 334,763 47,060 14.06% Nevada 68,080 3,365 4.94% New Hampshire 137,758 28,899 20.98% New Jersey 1,370,894 287,717 20.99% New Mexico 248,217 22,967 9.25% New York 3,606,894 751,722 20.84% North Carolina 1,114,458 11,302 1.01% North Dakota 158,497 18,485 11.66% Ohio 2,349,326 362,249 15.42% Oklahoma 558,457 17,688 3.17% Oregon 420,672 29,165 6.93% Pennsylvania 2,569,738 562,861 21.90% Rhode Island 187,674 48,328 25.75% South Carolina 591,249 9,390 1.59% South Dakota 165,433 14,623 8.84% Tennessee 816,229 19,517 2.39% Texas 2,314,718 148,620 6.42% Utah 242,313 4,116 1.70% Vermont 90,402 14,101 15.60% Virginia 888,909 37,892 4.26% Washington 690,880 47,679 6.90% West Virginia 454,617 15,419 3.39% Wisconsin 975,455 227,686 23.34% Wyoming 83,094 3,784 4.55% Totals 42,099,576 5,287,230 12.56% 444 PAGENO="0389" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1211 ANNEX B ANALYSIS OF "MEMORANDUM ON THE IMPACT OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION UPON FEDERAL Am TO EDUCATION," ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE, MARCH 28, 1961127 The conclusions of this Memorandum may be summarized as follows: (1) "across-the-board" grants and loans to church-related schools are unconstitutional; (2) tuition payments for all pupils in church-related schools are equally invalid; (3) the providing of milk, lunches, and bus transportation to pupils in church-related schools appears to be consti- tutional; (4) loans for special purposes not closely related to religious instruction, such as the loans in Title III of the National Defense Edu- cation Act, are probably constitutional; (5) how far the principle of special purpose loans may be extended is difficult to ascertain.'28 These conclusions apply only to elementary and secondary church- related schools. The inclusion of church-related colleges and universi- ties in federal aid to higher education is fully supported by the Depart- ment' in the body of the Memorandum.~ In a subsequent memorandum, dated June 27, 1961, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare explicitly sustained the consti- tutionality of certain proposed amendments to Title III of the National Defense Education Act insofar as they would authorize loans to private non-profit elementary and secondary schools, including church-related institutions, for the purposes of providing "special educational facilities" and "physical development facilities." Since this second memorandum is only an application of the constitutional position developed in the first, it needs no special treatment here. Owing to the wide publicity given to the first HEW Memorandum, it has been judged advisable to present here a somewhat detailed analysis. Necessarily, this results in some repetition of the discussion of the principal cases, already treated in the body of this study. The Memoran- dum states that there is a "paucity of Supreme Court precedent" with respect to government aid to education in church-related schools.'3° 127 The Memorandum has been printed in Senate Doc. No. 29, 87th Cong. 1st Sess. 7 (1961). All page references to the Memorandum [hereinafter cited as HEW Memorandum] are to the edition in this issue of the Georgetown Law Journal. 128 HEW Memorandum 351-53. ~ Id. at 377-81. 130 Id. at 355. 445 PAGENO="0390" 1212 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Nevertheless, the Memorandum proceeds to derive a large body of supposedly controlling principles from such admittedly meager materials. This process was greatly assisted by the Memorandum's reliance, not upon the holdings of the cases, but upon sweeping generalizations in some of the majority and many of the dissenting opinions. Such generalizations, it is true, may not be readily discounted. But neither may the holdings of the cases. They are the precise decisional results deriving from particular critical facts; and it is these, not the broadly stated rationales given in their support, which are recognized as "con- trolling" when the precedent value of cases is assessed. Everson v. Board of Education The most important case having possible precedent value respecting the instant problem is Everson v. Board of Educ.131 The Everson case upheld, over first amendment-fourteenth amendment objections, reimbursement to parents for transportation of their children to (inter alia) Catholic schools on regular buses used in the public transportation system. This decision is not changed by characterizing it, as does the Memorandum, as a decision "by the closest margin (5-4) *"132 Jf today the Everson decision is to be adhered to, then its underlying principle must be accepted: that at least some forms of government aid may be rendered to a citizen in furtherance of his obtaining education in a church-related school. If today the Everson decision is to be recon- sidered, then simultaneously there must be a reconsideration of the excursive essay of Justice Black therein, relating to the historical mean- ing of the No Establishment Clause. Of course, under discussion of neither of the alternatives have the dissenting opinions of Justices Rut- ledge and Jackson significance from the point of view of precedence or ratio decidendi. Taking the first of the foregoing alternatives, it is apparent that the Department Memorandum misses the significance of the Everson decision: 131 330 U.S. 1 (1947). 132 HEW Memorandum 358. Moreover, this comment in the Memorandum ignores the significance of the Feb. 20, 1961, dismissal by the Supreme Court of the appeal in Snyder v. Town of Newtown, 365 U.S. 299 (1961). Compare the subsequent footnote on this case in HEW Memorandum 361 n.5. As the Memorandum notes, the issue in Snyder was the same as that in Everson. The Supreme Court dismissed, 7-2, for want of a substantial federal question. 44(~ PAGENO="0391" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1213 1. The Memorandum states that the Court has ruled in Everson that across-the-board grants are prohibited.'~ First, it must be considered that the broad speculative generalizations respecting the scope of the No Establishment Clause appearing in Justice Black's opinion-("The `establishment of religion' clause of the First Amendment means at least this . . . .")`34-must be considered as limited by the opinion of the Court in Zoracli v. Clauson.'35 This was recognized by Justice Black himself in his dissenting opinion in the Zoracli case. It is no answer to assert, as does the Memorandum, that the Court in Zorach stated that "Government may not finance religious groups,"136 since the principal effect of government aid to parochial schools, when seen from the point of view of the public interest, would not be to aid "religious groups" but to further the public interest in education of the citizenry. The opinion of the Court in Zorach markedly departs from the opinion of the Court in Everson insofar as the scope of disestablishment is con- cerned, and makes it clear that state and church, though separate, may commonly participate in matters related to the public interest. Indeed in Zorac/z it was said: When the state encourages religious instruction or cooperates with religious authorities by adjusting the schedule of public events to sectarian needs, it fol- lows the best of our traditions. For it then respects the religious nature of our people and accommodates the public service to their spiritual needs.'37 Secondly, Everson conclusively establishes the "social benefits" doctrine. We are then left, apparently, to ascertain some point at which the "social benefit" is inconsiderable and the "reli- gious function" is predominant.'38 The Court in Everson did not have before it a question of "across-the-board"3° aid, but it may logi- cally be argued that, so far as the teaching of Evcrson goes, its essen- tial "social benefits" doctrine applied today would encompass even "across-the-board" aid. The dissenting opinion of Justice Rutledge in Everson was not able to distinguish between degrees of aid, or differences 1i~5 HEW Memorandum 351. 134 330 U.S. at 15-16. 135 343 U.S. 306 (1952). 136 HEW Memorandum 352. 137 343 U.S. at 313-14. 138 330 U.S. at 18. 139 Although it must be noted that the Memorandum never defines the term, "across- the-board," which it employs. 447 PAGENO="0392" 1214 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS between "direct" and "indirect" benefits or "direct" and "fringe" bene- fits. To Justice Rutledge, what was sanctioned by the majority was direct aid to the religious institution. In this connection Professor Paul G. Kauper has stated: But to distinguish on principle from this type of benefit ["fringe" or "auxil- iary"] and the more substantial benefits that would accrue from subsidies to pay teachers' salaries or to provide educational facilities presents difficulties, par- ticularly when it is noted that in the Everson case the Court emphasized that the state imposed a duty on all parents to send their children to some school and that the parochial school in question met the secular education standards fixed by the state. By hypothesis the school building and the instruction in secular courses also meet the state's requirements. When we add to this that education is appropriately a function of both government and religion, the question may well be raised whether the same considerations that govern the problems of bus transportation costs and text books, as well as the question of public grants to hospitals under religious auspices, do not point to the conclu- sion, whatever different conclusions may be reached under state constitutions, that the First Amendment, in conjunction with the Fourteenth, does not stand in the way of governmental assistance for parochial schools.'4° Thirdly, the reasoning of the Department Memorandum founders upon difficulties presented by the existence of such benefits to religious institutions as tax exemptions. It is at once apparent that constitutional sanction of tax exemptions (which exemptions are, practically speak- ing, equivalent to bounties) further weakens arguments that "direct" grants to parochial schools would be impermissible because such aid would support the "religious function" thereof. Fourthly, an important qualification upon the "no aid" language of the Everson majority is expressly given in their opinion. It being clear that the government may not set up an official church, the No Establish- ment Clause appears to have its principal mandate as auxiliary to the free exercise clause. The majority opinion in Everson makes this clear. There could be no other exp]anation for the Court's holding that the No Establishment Clause is made applicable to the states by the fourteenth amendment. Moreover, the opinion of the Court at numer- ous points expressly stresses that "religious liberty" (free exercise) is the determinant with respect to all government legislation respecting religion which goes beyond "establishing" (in the British sense) a church. The opinion states: "The people . . - reached the conviction that individual religious liberty could be achieved best under a govern- 140 Kauper, Frontiers of Constitutional Liberty 136 (1956). 44~ PAGENO="0393" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1215 ment which was stripped of all power to tax, to support, or otherwise to assist any or all religions * The Court quoted Jefferson's "Bill for Establishing Religious Free- dom" in its exposition of the meaning of the No Establishment Clause, which stressed that religious liberty required no man should be com- pelled to support "any religious worship, place, or ministry whatso- ever."42 Assuredly, then, the clause does not bar aid to church-related schools where the predominant benefit of such aid is not to the institution but to the citizen-student. Fifthly, the Memorandum itself fully demonstrates that extensive government aid is presently furnished to church-related educational in- stitutions. Or to assert, as does the Department, that such aid is not actually aid to institutions as institutions, is to do no more than really establish that across-the-board grants may be made to such institutions. As is explained in more detail infra, the "criteria" for aid which the Department (and not the Court) has constructed do not withstand analysis. 2. The Memorandum implies that the Court has ruled in Everson that loans to church-related schools are invalid. For the reasons stated supra with respect to across-the-board grants, it is clear that such loans would not be invalid. The Memorandum goes to remarkable lengths in attempting to justify its position. It cites McCollum v. Board of Educ. as authority for the proposition that loans would be uncon- stitutional, resting here upon its own employment of the word "lend."143 The opinion of the Court in McCollum nowhere employs the word "lend" or "loan," and the utilization of the classrooms in McCollum was not at all a "lending" in the sense the term is used in financial loans. Again, the Memorandum cites the Zorach case as authority, quoting therefrom the statement "Government may not finance religious groups."44 This begs the question, the Memorandum failing to estab- lish that the making of loans to parochial schools would in fact be to "finance religious groups." 3. The Memorandum states that tuition payments for all church school pupils are invalid under the rule of the Everson case "since they accomplish by indirection what grants do directly." It is in large 141 330 U.S. at 11. `~ Id. at 12, 13. 143 HEW Memorandum 352. 144 Ibid. 44~ PAGENO="0394" 1216 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS part true that such payments would accomplish what grants would accomplish, namely, to educate the citizen-student. As has been seen, this would violate no constitutional precedent. It is also true, however, that the Memorandum itself asserts that tuition may be constitutionally paid by the government to students in institutions of higher education. For reasons more fully explored at a later part of this analysis, it would seem clear that the fact that the student would be in an institu- tion of elementary or secondary education would be without consti- tutional significance. Indeed, the Department's principal argument in justification of rejection of aid (whether by tuition grants or other- wise) for elementary or secondary education in church-related schools, while qualifiedly upholding it in the case of higher education, would seem to work in reverse. That argument is, that education at the lower levels is general and compulsory.145 Since it is compulsory that all children obtain elementary education, and since the education which the state requires may be obtained in church-related schools, and since these are the sole schools which certain children may as a matter of conscience attend, and, finally, since these schools presently are educat- ing millions of American children, therefore it would seem that the in- stitutions performing this public task (or the children who therein fulfil their public obligation) should have a clearer claim for public funds than would institutions or students in higher education. McCollum v. Board of Education A brief answer to the Memorandum's utilization of the McCollum case would be to say simply that it is not in point. It is remarkable that the Memorandum, which finds the closely relevant Everson decision to have no precedent value whatever with respect to the problem of grants and loans, discovers in the McCollum decision, which dealt with a very different problem, so much value as precedent. It is true that Justice Black, writing for the majority in McCollum, restated his views respecting the scope of the No Establishment Clause. (It may be noted incidentally that while the Memorandum quotes extensively from the dissenting opinions of Justice Rutledge in the Everson case, it all but totally ignores the lengthy dissent of Justice Reed in McCollum). As has been noted, the rationale of the McCollum case is seriously qualified by the subsequent decision in the Zoracli case. Some consti- tutional scholars consider that the McCollum decision was in fact over- 145 Id. at 37~. 4~o PAGENO="0395" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1217 ruled by Zorac/z. As professor Kauper has stated: "One may well agree with the dissenters [in Zoracli] that the majority decision in the Zoracli case . . . amounted in substance to an overruling of the McCollum case."46 The "on-the-premises," "off-the-premises" distinction between the two cases seems not significant in view of the principal point made by the majority in McCollum, that the released time program there was un- lawful because it encouraged recruitment into religion classes. This coercive element was equally present in the dismissed time program considered in Zoracli, and the dissenting justices in Zorac/z indeed deemed McCollum to be overruled. It is interesting to note that the Department apparently agrees.'47 Zoracli v. Clauson In view of what has hitherto been stated herein with respect to the Zorach decision, only the following brief comments remain to be directed to the Department's appraisal thereof. It must be stated that the Department Memorandum largely mis- conceives the teaching of the Zorach case. The Memorandum states: "The most that can be said [of Zoracli] is that the opinion evidenced a more flexible attitude toward problems of separation."48 Whatever legal meaning can be derived from this description is most uncertain. The dissenting opinions in Zorach were more definite. Justice Black saw in the majority opinion therein a new interpretation of the first amend- ment.'49 So did Justices Jackson and Frankfurter.'5° In attempting to establish its thesis, the Department encounters formidable difficulty in attempting to reconcile Zorach and again resorts to vague expression in appraising that case: "Zorach reaffirms that the state may not actively support a religious organization. On the other hand, it may, and perhaps under some circumstances must, temper its secular requirements if religious observances conflict with them."5' Notably, the Court in Zoracli made it clear that the Constitution does not require in all respects a separation of church and state and that 146 Kauper, Frontiers of Constitutional Liberty 122 (1956). 147 HEW Memorandum 363. 148 Ibid. `"~ 343 U.S. at 315-20. 150 Id. at 320-25. 151 HEW Memorandum 358. 4.~l PAGENO="0396" 1218 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS the state may in numerous ways accommodate its programs to the religious interests of its citizens and institutions. This distinction between "aid to religion" and "accommodation of religion" is the basic proposition of Zorach. The distinction obviously makes "aid to religion" a highly technical concept, since religion was unquestionably "aided" as well as "accommodated" by the released- time program. The Department Memorandum, however, constantly applies the "no aid" principle in dogmatically literal manner without adverting to the fact that Zorach has interpreted and limited the prin- ciple in terms of a constitutional philosophy that is open to the accom- modation of public services to religious interests. Rule by semantics should never take the place of the rule of law. It can only result in complete confusion. A good example of this confusion is the Department Memorandum's assertion that loans are unconsti- tutional even if there is "no economic loss from the standpoint of the taxpayers."52 HEW explains that such a loan "might, nonetheless, be of measurable economic assistance to private institutions unable to secure reasonable credit from non-Government sources."53 Another example of the same confusion lies in HEW's frequent recurrence to the "liberation of funds" argument.'54 Any form of joint financing by the government and religious institutions of secular activities, HEW argues, is constitutionally vulnerable, because it results at least in free- ing funds for religious purposes which the religious institutions would otherwise have spent on secular welfare activities. This liberation of funds is "aid to religion" and therefore unconstitutitional. Such an argument condemns itself. It treats the "no aid" principle as if it were merely a phrase in the English dictionary. It cannot be reconciled with Zorach or the un- broken American tradition of the joint financing by religious and governmental organizations of social welfare activities. Cochran v. Board of Education The Memorandum dismisses the Cochran case as one of "dubious authority for the proposition that textbooks may be provided by a State to parochial school students."155 While it is true that first amendment 152 Id. at 369. 153 Ibid. 154 Id. at 370. 155 Id. at 359 n.4. 45~ PAGENO="0397" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1219 considerations were not involved in Cochran, it is also true that that case established that the use of government funds to provide secular textbooks for church-related school students was justifiable as being an expenditure for a public purpose. Importantly, the Court per Justice Hughes, stated: The schools, however, are not the beneficiaries of these appropriations. They obtain nothing from them, nor are they relieved of a single obligation because of them. The school children and the state alone are beneficiaries . . . . The legislation does not segregate private schools or their pupils, as its beneficiaries, or attempt to interfere with any matters of exclusively private concern. Its interest is education, broadly; its method comprehensive. Individual interests are aided only as the common interest is safeguarded.15° The Cochran opinion therefore recognizes that the teaching of secular subjects in a church-related school is the performance of a public func- tion and that such program may therefore be governmentally aided. Here, obviously, the Department might have discovered a contradic- tion to its repeated assertion that grants, loans, and tuition payments may not be made to church-related schools upon the supposition that these aid in the carrying out of the school's "religious function." The Department states that "religious considerations are intertwined in the entire fabric of sectarian education" and therefore "moneys raised by taxation cannot be used to support such education."57 The Supreme Court, however, was able to distinguish the public aspect of education in church-related schools from its private (religious) aspect and held, in effect, that whatever benefit might accrue to the institution from the aid given, such was incidental to the public benefit conferred upon the citizen-student and therefore constitutionally without significance. Pierce v. Society of Sisters The Memorandum pays little heed to the Supreme Court decision in the Pierce case. It is true that Pierce was decided before it was clear that the first amendment is made applicable to the states by the four- teenth amendment. It is also true, as Professor Howe and others have noted, that decided in a single opinion with Pierce was the companion case of Pierce v. Hill Military Academy, which involved the application of the same Oregon Compulsory Education Act to a nonreligious school. However, the case plainly involved freedom of religion. The issue was specifically raised in the Society's complaint and in its brief before the 156 281 U.S. 370, 375 (1930). `~ HEW Memorandum 361. 4~)3 PAGENO="0398" 1220 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATIOX AMENDMENTS United States Supreme Court. The issue occupies a considerable part of the transcript of the oral arguments before the Court. Justice Rut- ledge, in his dissenting opinion in Everson gave recognition to the speci- fic religious element in the Pierce decision.'58 The true significance of Pierce was never stated in the Department Memorandum. Pierce not only upholds the liberty of parent and child freely to choose for the education of the latter a church-related school; it also denies a power in the state to monopolize education: The fundamental theory of liberty upon which all governments in this Union repose excludes any general power of the state to standardize its children by forcing them to accept instruction from public teachers only. The child is not the mere creature of the state; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.'59 It is not, of course, intended here to suggest that the economic com- pulsion which would be visited upon the Catholic parent and child by massive expenditures for public schools only would be legally com- parable to a cumpulsory public education scheme such as was employed in Oregon. It is important to point out, however, that the same standard- ization of which the Court warned would be the probable eventual result of such a one-sided spending program. The great question of policy, upon which the Court in Pierce puts its finger, is whether the public interest lies in the creating of a unitary Kultur. Irrelevant Criteria The "criteria" for "aid" given in the Memorandum are, of course, nowhere to be found in the cases. They represent, rather, the Depart- ment's attempt to make the cases fit its thesis. The Department is able to create a thinly plausible reconciliation of the cases and the con- stitutional principles involved principally by refusing to define "religious function" and by refusing to state the specifics of how some sort of "aid" does in fact result in aiding "religion" or the carrying out of "religious functions." At this point in its Memorandum, of course, the Depart- ment assumes that it has conclusively established that nothing in the way of what it dubiously calls "across-the-board" aid can be made to religion. The Memorandum thus justifies (as it must) Everson in that the aid there given was for a "legitimate public concern." But if aid is 158 330 U.s. at 51. 268 U.s. 510, 535 (1925). 4~4 PAGENO="0399" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1221 to be justified upon this basis, then aid to any form of state-approved schooling should be upheld. The Memorandum lays great stress upon the views of the dissenters in Everson, who "characterized the statute as having the purpose of getting the child to school-an indispensable part of his education."6° But if the dissenters were right in this, and the majority upheld the statute, then Everson plainly holds that that which is indispensably necessary to the educating of a child in a church-related school is con- stitutional. This consideration is not reflected in the Memorandum. The Memorandum, as has been indicated, is totally unable to support its distinction between such aids as police, fire and sewerage on the one hand, and tuition, books, grants or loans on the other. The problem is not solved by semantics. Calling one form of aid "incidental" and the other "direct" changes no fact. Sewerage, to which the Department refers, is a sine qua non to the teaching of religion to groups of chil- dren. The providing of a school bus trip to the child who cannot other- wise attend a church-related school is actually as much an aid to his getting a religious education as there being a classroom in which he may be instructed at the trip's end. The Department's talk about "side effects of benefiting a religious institution" is meaningless unless (1) we are supplied with specific facts showing how-not a religious institution, but a church or sect-comes to be benefited, and (2) whether that benefit must not be ignored when seen in relation to the benefits to the citizen-student. Although the Department furnishes many examples of aids which it says are not aids to religion, it is at a loss to show how financial aid is any the more essential to the church-related school than the aids which the Department would sanction. The sections of the Memorandum respecting "criteria," it must be said in brief, are so shot through with categorical generalizations that little is served by attempting detailed analysis thereof. The controlling premises are found in such unsupported statements as "the State may not aid the religious instruction of a child";'6' a "legislative proposal [must not be] a mere subterfuge for religious support";162 the "means employed [must not] result . . . in support of religious jflStjtUtiOnS.~~163 `~ HEW Memorandum 366. 181 Id. at 368. 162 Id. at 365. 183 Id. at 366. 4~ PAGENO="0400" 1222 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. PucIxsKI. When we enacted title III of ESEA, there was con- siderable testimony at that. time that we were going to have community supplemental training for education centers, centers that would have compensatory education, centers that would have remedial reading and the various other facilities which youngsters in that community re- gardless of what schools they were attending, whether they were at- tending public schools or parochial schools to come to these centers and get this additional education that they need. That. was a point that attracted me perhaps most to title III. Now, I am not aware of any such centers having been constructed. Are there any in Chicago or are there any in the country where youngsters have a community, can come in and get their additional training. Monsignor DoNolirE. Mr. Cicco who is the deputy superintendent in Pittsburgh I think can speak to this first. Mr. PUcINsKI. Are there any in Chicago? Monsignor MCMANFS. In the archdiocese, yes, but in the city of Chicago, no. Mr. PucIxsKI. Why is that? Monsignor MC~L1Nts. I could guess the reason. Thus far the administration of the Chicago public schools and the board con- fronted with all of the monumental difficulties of getting titles I and II underway have not been in a position to develop the utilization of title III funds. Outside the city of Chicago in Arlington- Mr. PUcINsKI. That is the very point I am making. I think ui the administration of this program they have been so preoccupied with the inner city that the outer city is not getting its fair share and as a result we continue to see the plight of families looking for better education. It would appear to me that this title III does offer our large cities an opportunity to provide the kind of compensation for education in a commumty that will arrest the flight of families into the suburbs. Certainly when they set up compensatory centers in the suburbs it is understandable that families will gravitate to those communities which have the best education. For that reason I hope the Office of Education will stimulate the construction of these centers in the so- called outer city areas in the suburban areas. Monsignor MCMANFS. I share your convictions there, Congress- man. I know in the Oak Park-River Forest township received over ~i million in construction funds to increase the size of their high school. On northwest side and west side of Chicago there is nothing exciting underway that would persuade people to remain within the city where there would be special services available to both the public and non- public-school teachers as well as children. If I might get back a bit into history, Mr. Brademas would recall this I am sure. The original idea of title III was that there was to be a consortium of public and private educators and a separate corpo- ration that. could forge ahead. Instead the law as it finally came out required the only people who could initiate anything under title III would be the public school agency, so the large metropolitan areas found themselves in so much money they just did not know- how- to utilize it for the purposes. PAGENO="0401" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1223 Mr. Cicco. Congressman, I would like to add to that. I reiterate your concern from my experience from in and around Pittsburgh and throughout the State of Pennsylvania on title III. I would like to hasten to add that I feel very optimistic about title I. But I too had the idea that title III would provide consortiums and educational research- Mr. PUcINsKI. Isn't one reason you have not had better luck with title III that the committee which approved these projects placed a greater emphasis on innovative demonstration projects rather than hard-proven formulas of education that communities need. I think this committee as far as this member of Congress is con- cerned has to some degree distort.ed the iiitend of Congress. I don't recall in the debate on title III ever saying that we. are going to give top priority to innovative and demonstration projects. I recall that we were going t.o set up the very things we are talking about. In my congressional district being the outer city I have youngsters who need compensatory education, remedial reading, remedial math, va- rious other forms of assistance and they are not getting it simply because the Office of Education has been diverting this money to so- called demonstration projects instead of ongoing, proven projects that we can establish hi Chicago or Cincinnati or in any other city. Mr. Cioco. As a result we have a number of fragmented programs that are being eaten up as far as I am concerned to a. great extent by administration. Mr. PuciNsul. Thank you very much. Mr. ERLENBORN. Let me say first to Dr. Swanson, I appreciated your statement very much. I think it was very much to the point. It may have touched some sore spots with those who disagree with your conclusion about categorical aid and general aid but I think the essence of your testimony was attested to by the immediate and strong response we got from the other side of the aisle here today but I did appreciate your statement and many of your conclusions. With that I will yield my time to t:he gentleman from Minnesota. Mr. Qun~. I have just one question that is bothering me. On page 4 of your statement you said: There is a large trained, able, and willing body of educators which has not been tapped. I am speaking of more than 177,000 private elementary and sec- ondary school teachers who could be available at 1ea~t on a part-time basis, and in many cases on a full-time basis, to staff ESEA programs. I would expect they are pretty busy now. How could they be avail- any more than public school teachers are available ? Monsi~nor D0N0HUE. What I meant. first of all, was to indicate that there is a corps of teachers under pri\ate ausl)iees who certainly would not be available all the time. and some who would not, be avail- able at all but there is that large corps of teachers and maiiy of them would be available and willing to do work on projects that. would be of service to the total educational community. Mr. Cicco. I would like to add to that. In my experience with the Office there was a general concept throughout the country among many public school administrators that they could not use religious teachers during off time, off time after school, summertime, Saturdays, and what have you. 7~5-492-G7-pt. 2-26 PAGENO="0402" 1224 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS This concept which in my mind at least is incorrect made in many instances a condition where a number of teachers were available and happy to participate and were not approached on that basis. Mr. QrnE. These are lay teachers. Mr. Cicco. Lay and religious, sisters and brothers. Monsignor MCMANTTS. This week there are a number of sixth-grade pupils from both the public and parochial schools in Chicago at camp on a program called outdoor education. Many of these youngsters have never been outside the city before. The archdiocese of Chicago through its various agencies is paying the private school teachers their regular salary while they are engaging in the instructional program. After the regular school hours they are put on temporary duty along with the public school teachers to supervise these youngsters and to take them on various excursions outside the camp and do the other type of work that is necessary for a rounded out program of outdoor educ at ion. Without. the assistance of our teachers, it would have been impos- sible to carry out this program, and I would admit quite candidly that given the weather, in Chicago it was not particularly easy to persuade. teachers to go out to camp in this early spring or prespring program. This is another illustration of Monsignor Donohue's good point that the maturity that is developing in these relations, it is essential that we inconvenience ourselves for programs that are in the interest of the central city children. Mr. QmE. Let me ask you another question which has to do with the prohibition that we have in a number of the educational bills now against the teaching of religion or the use of the building for religious worship and so forth m an effort to prevent Federal funds from being used in the teaching of religion. In the last year I wonder if we have not left out another group, the ones who teach against religion. Do von think there is any necessity for prohibiting Federal funds for that use? I am more bothered with the teaching against religion than I am by the fact that you would be teaching the religion as you see it differently than we Lutherans see it. Monsignor MCMANUS. I share your concern about the problem but I would hate to see the establishment of a Federal Department of Theology to determine whether religion was or was not being taught. For a few things left locally this would probably be one of the things von would have to risk on both sides. Mr. QUTE. We already have Federal legislation against religion. I have a question on the alexia involved with children. I have a close friend who does remedial reading wit.h younger kids. I find out something like 10 percent of the kids have alexia to the degree that it hinders them from progressing sufficiently in school. This is not counting the percentage that have it to the degree that they over- come it by themselves. This is a pretty large number of children who are having difficulty in their education system and I don't see it attacked very well in the school systems right now. PAGENO="0403" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDT.TCATION AMENDMENTS 1225 Mr. GEER. There are a number of school systems over the country who are developing special classes which carry different types of titles. For example, in this area I think the classes for the perceptually handicapped is one term that is used. Actually these children, many of them, do have problems of learning at the early age and these prob- lems become compounded. There is a national association that has formed around this particu- lar area, an association for children with learning disabilities. That is a very rapidly growing group largely composed of parents and people concerned with this. The Office of Education has one staff member now who is primarily concerned with alexia or other terms which may be used, learning dis- abilities, perceptually impaired. For a long time we have known that there were a number of children with brain injury to various degrees. Sometimes this is manifested with muscular manifestations and more often referred to as cerebral palsy. There is still another group whose motor function is not visibly affected who are affected in vision, speech, hearing, and various other ways and actually ideation of the brain. I think it is significant that we have programs starting in this field and in some instances fairly well developed. The. recent legislation- the Elementary and Secondary Act Amendments of 1966-I am not sure which side the Congressman was on~ but t.he report stated children with special learning problems were to be included in that.. All I can say at the moment is that we are making some headway in trying to find out what this is all about and how far we can go with it.. It might be well to ask Dr. Wiflenberg to indicate what is being done in California because here is one State which is making a fairly good degree of progress. Mr. QuIE. I would like to hear from Dr. Willenberg, if I may. Mr. WILLENBERG. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, the California State Legislature in 1963 enacted legislation that estab- lished a category of programs for so-called educationally handicapped children consisting of those youngsters who have significant emotional problems in combination with neurological impairments and in con- junction with retarded academic development. Of course, included in this group would be these youngsters that you have referred to as children with alexia. Actually, alexia is a medical term that attributes a learning disorder which is particularly related to reading, to neurological involvement which may be a neuro- logical insult or simply lack of neurological development. Our concern in the development of the program for educationally handicapped youngsters originated from the recognition of the fact that it is too difficult to differentiate etiologically with the different youngsters as to their causes of difficulties that it would be better administratively to have some umbrella type of legislation in order to allow them, after we bring in the youngsters, to have the special needs to proceed with the organization of the instructional groups and to accomplish by trial and error in some instances and by known evi- dence in other instances as much as we possibly can with them aca- demically as well as in the realm of emotional adjustment.. PAGENO="0404" 1226 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS There has been sufficient research done in recent years to indicate that a multisensory approach to teaching these youngsters which was espoused by a Swiss educator more than 130 years ago is about as effective a method of teaching these children as one can employ presently. The sense-perception method of training these children: employing the visual as well as the auditory systems of input. Mr. QUIE. Do you have a system of testing ab the kindergarten level to determine whether they are going to run into these difficulties or do you wait until they have the learning difficulties before you start? Mr. WILLENBERG. We have instruments that are sufficiently reliable- Mr. QLTIE. You have instruments, but what is the policy? Mr. WILLENBERG. To systematically screen the youngsters? Mr. QUIE. Yes. Mr. WILLENBEIiG. There is no policy which systematically screens these youngsters for such disorders. Mr. Qt~E. Are there any in New York, Dr. Swanson? Mr. SWANSON. I know of none. Mr. Qmi. Let's take a look at the private schools. Father Mc- Manus, do you know of any in Chicago? Monsignor MCMANUS. Certainly not in the private sector. I am not fully acquainted with all of the provisions for exceptional chil- dren, handicapped children throughout the suburban area. Monsignor DONOHUE. I was superintendent of schools in Balti- more before I came to this job in Washington. We have had some experimentation in just the program you are talking about, the Swiss program. A number of our nuns have been away at different schools where this approach has been taught. and they have been using it. We have quite an extensive program in handling alexia and various malfunc- tions of that type. There are three or four otlìer dioceses in the country that have been dealing with these areas-Boston, Mass., I know, St. Louis, Mo. I don't know about our schools out on the west coast. Mr. QmE. I understand Mr. Brademas has some questions and wants to leave. Mr. BRADEMAS. I have just a couple. I want to expre~ my appre- ciation to you, Monsignor Donohue, and all of your colleagues for coming. If it is not inappropriate., Mr. Chairman, I think this is the first time that representatives of the. United States Catholic Confer- ence have come before us on education, at least that I can recall since the death of your predecessor. Monsignor TIoc.hwait. Monsignor DoxolluE. I appeared before this committee last year. You were not here on that (lay but this is our second time. Mr. BRADEMAS. I want. to say another word about him because he contributed significantly to the passage of this important legislation. I have just one question on this matter of teachers. Do I understand generally you are saying that you are fac~ in the Roman Catholic parochial schools in the United States with a shortage of teachers at. the elementary and secondary level? Monsignor Doxoi~~. I think this is a very factual statement. PAGENO="0405" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1227 Mr. BRADEMAS. I am told by a. constituent of mine at Notre Dame that a study is coming out suggesting in effect that. the Roman Catho- lic Church leave the elementary school business. Have you any comment to make on that? Monsignor 1)oxonu~. Monsignor McMa.nus is chomping at the bit here to get a word in. I very much doubt that the. immediate future will see anything like this. Monsignor MCMANtTS. Mr. Lee, to whom you referred, suggested the elimination of the Catholic elementary schools. If I were to tell Dr. James Redman the superintendent of the Chicago public schools tomorrow that we are going to drop only the first grade, he would have to prepare immediately for 27,000 additional children presently enrolled. The point~ is that we are now not only under a religious compulsion but a civic compulsion to keep these schools going. Drastic measures would have to be taken by the civil arm if we were to do what we were not even thinking of doing-walking out on these children. Mr. BRADEMAS. Are you interest.ed in teacher aids of the type we heard about from our Bank Street witnesses today? Monsignor MCMANUS. Yes, sir, we are most interested. I might cite an example. At Our Lady of Angels School where there had been a fire a few years ago, we have 125 volunteers, full-time aids. At 3 o'clock this afternoon a teacher can write a recognition for the kind of aids she needs-a stenographer, somebody to work with the group in the library or what-have-you. The result is we are turning in superior performance by the use of what is not too complimentally called subprofessional help. I would say if the USEA laws or regulations a.re amended so a substantial number of teacher aids could be put into the central city schools this would free our dedicated pro- fessiona.l help to work entirely on the business of education, not to be concerned with such sideline chores as taking the youngsters out to the playground, to the lavatories and so on. Mr. BRADEMAS. Can you agree to my generalization at least. from watching the situation in my own district that the passage of ESEA has significantly enhanced the degree of cooperation between local pub- lic school authorities and local private school authorities? Monsignor MCMANUS. I would say it is the historic event of this decade and I would say besides that categorical aid, although it~ may have its difficulties, is the approach that was the result of efforts on the part of men like Mr. Perkins and others to get a satisfactory solution. Everybody adjusted as you lmow, and we have a working program. Here I would like to echo Dr. Redman's words that it would be well for the educational profession not to grumble t.oo loudly about. the complications of categorical aid least the end result be no a.id what- soever. It is just a little too soon to condemn this program. Let's see how it goes for a few more years and then we can all then have another study of perhaps another general approach to education. Mr. BRADEMAS. Mr. Pucinski comes from your home area of Chica.~o and be has become chairman of a very important. subcommittee and I think he will continue to give important leadership in the field of cdn~ation. PAGENO="0406" 1228 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Monsignor MOMANUS. We are very proud to have him. Mr. CAI~y. Monsignori and those who are not monsignori at the table, are we going to have the benefit of your continuing testimony after recess? It is going to he necessary for us to recess in about 1 minute and come back after quorum call or a vote, whatever it is. You will be available? Monsignor DoxoHu~E. Certainly. Mr. CAniY. WThen we come, if it is in the province of your present knowledge, would you be prepared to comment on the recent study by the United States Chamber of Commerce on the matters of economic opportunity and educational progress in the country that are con- tained in the recommendations of a leading panel of educators and others in the country, leadership of all kinds where it takes up the questions of progress in education? Is that within your province and would you comment on this? Do you know t.he report I am referring to? Monsignor DoNomirr. That is also the report where they are talking about the wisdom of competition in education. Mr. CAREY. In the words of the report I think it calls for a heavy dose of the good elixir of competition in order to free the forces of adversity in education for the benefit of the children in the low- income areas. I would like to address some questions t.o you on that report when we return. We will recess until about 3 :30. (Whereupon. the subcommittee recessed to reconvene at. 3 :30 p.m. the same day.) AVFER RECESS Mr. SCHEUER. The. meeting will come t.o orde.r. Congressman Meeds, do you have any further quest.ions to ask the panel? Mr. MEEDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am sorry, I was not here t.o hear their testimony, nor have I had time to review the written testimony. so I will just listen, if I may. Mr. SCHEETR. Well, then, le.t me thank the panel for some of the most stimulating, thought-provoking testimony that I have heard throughout these hearings. You have given us a great deal of sober analysis and insight, and I thank you very. very much, Dr. Niemeyer and Mrs. Williams. Mrs. Williams. we were all very impressed by your formal testimony this morning. I wonder whether you would just chat with us in- formally. and tell us something about your training. low did von get to be in APIE. how did you get motivated, what. attracted you, how (lid von get into this school system. where did you do your training, what. kind of opportunities were there for training, and how do you happen to be at. this point, where you have made such a contribution, and you have, applied such insight and wisdom that you are testify- in~ here today, in effect, before 195 million American people? Mrs. WILLIAMS. Well as a mother of five children, I was always ac- tive in community work and interested in what. my children were doing and learning in school, so as a result of being active, and being in- te.re~te.d. I was president. of APIE for 2 years, whidi t~ek' me ~e of estlmates meetings, and different things. I was on the executive board at PS-1T7. when the school aid program came t.hrough, and PAGENO="0407" ELEMENTARI AND SECONDARY EDLCATION AMENDMENTS 1229 Mr. Press wanted to know if I was int.erest~j. He said I would be paid for the job that I had been doing all these years. Mr. SCHEUER. That is the school aide I)I~ogrilm under title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.? Mrs. WILLIA~rs. That is right, yes. But it was with the stipulation in my neighborhood that we could not work at the school that our children attended, so I was sent to PS-i. While at PS-i, Dr. Kurz- man realized that with my love of books and my love of children, that I would be better off working as a library aide. I was very fortunate to have Mrs. Chamberlain, who was attending New York University at the time, for her library certificate, to train me. Every time she went to class, I went to class, also. The only thing, I didn't attend the school. So I learned all of the skills- Mr. SCHETJER. In other words, you didn't go to NYU, but she taught you? Mrs. WILLIAMS. That is correct. Mr. SCHE1IER. And you got what we call on-the-job training, right in the school in the library. Mrs. WII~LIAMs. Yes, I did. Mr. Scm~u~R. You learned by doing. Mrs. WILLIAMS. I learned by doing, and I am really a top library aide in that field. I also became a storyteller, when it turned out that I was not only good with processing and doing the library work, but also telling stories to the younger children. And one job led to another. Then my duties were extended. Be- cause of my dealing with children and gaining their confidence, they allowed me to take over the assistant principal's job of working in with the prekindergarten, kindergarten, and first graders in the morning. Mrs. SCHEtTER. You worked with the kids? Mrs. WILLIAMS. That is right. We have a special area in our school where only these children go. Mr. SCHETJ-ER. Now, you also chat with their mothers? Mrs. WILLIAMS. Yes, I chat with their mothers; not only chat, I talk to a lot of the mothers, because a lot of the mothers have a way of clinging to their children. They have to let them learn to grow, to be independent of them. Mr. SCHETJEIi. What are the kinds of things you talk to the mothers about? Mrs. WILi~Ai~rs. Well, I talk to the mothers about giving the chil- dren a sense of independence, sometimes over dressing them, sometimes telling the children not to be afraid. I told them never to use this word. They should instill in the children that "school is a home away from home," and this has really worked out. Most parents can kiss their children goodby and leave them in the morning with no difficulty. Mr. SCHEUFR. How many hours a da.y do you work? Mrs. WILLIAMS. Four hours. Mr. SCHEtTER. I think the community has a real bargain in your services l)ecause there is about another 16 hours a lav or 14 hours a day that you are at home, and it seems to me, and you correct me if I ani wrong, that von are meeting the motlieis in your cornniunitv \vllen PAGENO="0408" 1230 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS you are shopping, when you are engaging in community activities, and in your church activities, and you are, in effect, a 24-hour worker. Mrs. WILLIAMS. Yes. Mr. SCHEtTER. And an interpreter of the goals of the school system to these mothers. Mrs. WILLIAMS. Oh, yes, it really is. Mr. SCHELER. I would not. think that your work and your talking stops after your 4-hour stint at school. Do you also talk to the mothers in your neighborhood? Mrs. WILLIAMS. Yes. I do. As a matter of fact., t.he children have asked me, "If you are going any place, let's go out the back, because you know too many people." But this is nice. I meet a. lot of parents, between them and the school. A lot, of parents are afraid to go into the school to talk to the teacher, t.o find out what problems there are with the children, and some children do have problems, and a lot of children have problems that. come into school in the mornings. They can't com- municate wit.h the teacher. I am the one they communicate with. Mr. SCIIEUER. And then you chat with their mothers in the neighbor- hood? Mrs. WILLIAMS. Wit.h their mothers, yes, and also with the teachers. This way we are working hand in hand together. I also take care of lateness, which used to be a chronic condition in the school, and most mornings, now, if I give out two late passes, it is a lot. Mr. SCITEUER. How many kids? Mrs. WTILLIAMS. Over 800. Mr. SCHEUER. Wow! And before, you say lateness was a problem? Mrs. WILLIAMS. Oh, there were mornings when you would have as many as 25 to 42 children late. (The following statement was submitted by Mrs. Williams:) 1. I receive the Kindergarten, first and fifth graders in the morning and send them up to their classrooms. This gives me the chance to meet and know their parents. Also to allay whatever fears either may have. This used to be the Assistant Principal's job. 2. I also take care of lateness. In an enrollment of over 800 children, it is very seldom now that I give out more than 5 late passes any morning. This used to be a real problem; some mornings there would be as many as 46 late passes issued. But being a community person I am able to talk to parents and children. This enables me to correct the situation. 3. I am a library aide. My work there Is a labor of love. I process and take care of all books that come into the library. Last, but not least, I try to instill Into the children the joy of reading for pleasure. It is a wonderful feeling and experience to see a child go from easy to non-fiction books and really enjoy It. 4. I was also trained under Title III to aid children with remedial reading needs. It's a wonderful joy to be able to help a child learn and understand one of the greatest joys of life. Mr. SCHEUER. Now, how do you explain your success in improving the promptness with which the kids and their mothers came to school? Mrs. WILLIAMS. There are some children, you know that it is their fault. and you know whether to pat. them on the head, or with some, whether to pat them a little lower down. `With some children, you know it. is their parents' fault. It. is not. their fault, and I explained to the parents, it. isn't. fair to send a child to school late, because they have missed 10 to 15 minutes of the. school workday, and the teacher has not got. the time t.o go baek over the work they have missed, and in talking to the parents, they themselves realize it for the first time. PAGENO="0409" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1231 They (10 try to get the children out earlier. And with children who I know it is because of stopping to call for another one, I tell them, "It is your education, not ~Johnny~s education, so you get here early," and, in turn, they will come to school earlier. Mr. SCHEUER. That is very interesting. Dr. Niemeyer, we have had the experience here of asking a number of school principals and superintendents whether they have read the three reports of the Xationa.l Advisory Council on title I. Now, all of these people have come to testify on title I, and I have yet to hear a single one who has read these reports. It. seems to me that mabe this is a problem of the dissemination of information about the successes as well as the failures under the. title. I program, and achieving a ripple effect, a proliferating effect. What are your thoughts on how we can avoid this gap in the trans- lation that is supposed to take place between the good idea an(1 its application to the school district.? Mr. NIEMEYER. Well, you certainly put your finger on one of the toughest problems that we face. I suppose in every one of the pro- fessions, in fairness to the schoolmen who have not read those-I agree with you, those are very wonderful, because they are written in such nice, simple English, for one reason-reports of the committee that Dr. Wilson heads. I know that for instance, somebody like Dr. Donovan, the head of the schools in New York City, works, I would guess, prob- ably a minimum of 18 hours a day, and just about 7 (lays a week, and just about every day in the year, and his phone goes most. of t.he night. I have called him at 3 in t.he morning, over crises situations, and so on, so that I think in fairness, we have t.o recognize that many of these men and women in these positions lead almost unbelievably full lives, in which they are just constantly warding off problems, and they really don't have too much chance to do studying, and to do much reading. Having said that, it would seem that then it would be the obligation of a system, of all systems, to set up some kind of agency within the agency to see that what is done experimentally in a school system and other school systems gets fed in appropriate ways into the right people in the school system. I think beyond that, we have to recognize that the printed word is a reasonably inefficient way of getting commumcat.ion to anyone, and I see this problem all over the United States. I don't think there is any-it is tied up with what I mentioned this morning, which is the fact that the school establishment or bureaucracy in its various units is not unlike other establishments, very, very difficult to change. They are so busy going in a certain direction, and using techniques and methods, it is not easy to change direction and use new methods. .knd, therefore, t.he dissemination problem is, in part, I think in major part, not just a question of a problem of people reading and just being informed about, but it is the problem of how does a school system effect change? Mr. SCHEtrER. May I ask you a question at this point? Mr. NIEMEYER. Yes. Mr. SCHEUER. We heard this morning from Austin P. Swanson, associate professor of education at the State University of Buffalo, PAGENO="0410" 1232 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS and he advoeate(l a change from a categorical giant program to a general support of State and local educatioii agencies, and he made this statement about the title I programs, that this change could be made, and I quote: "By having the local education agency claim its allocation from the State through a resolution of its board of trustees, indicating among other things, that it would spend the allocation according to the federally developed criteria." Now, do you think that a simple statement of intent of that kind, without other Federal leadership and guidance, would be sufficient to induce the kind of change we are discussing in the local education agency? Mr. NIEMEYER. Well, I think it was perhaps implied in something that I said this morning that I feel that it would be far from sufficient, that I am sure that there are reasons to look at the various bits of leg- islation, and the categories, and so on. I am not saying that what we have now is perfect by any means, but I am it great believer in what I called this morning competition. For instance, I think one of the ways in which school systems will be induced to change is by having competing systems. I think that we need every kind of challenge thrown out to people in my profession. I am sure, if I were a doctor, I would be saying the same thing about the medical profession, but I do not think that this can be left to the local groups, or to the State groups, or to the U.S. Office of Education. I don't want it residing in any one unit of the Government. But also, when the Congress of the United States decides, rightly or wrongly, that there is a priorit.y that has to be given, I think in limiting past legislation, allocating appropriate money for this, they not only have the right but have the obligation in some way to set up the guidelines, with the thought that this priority in some way will be met. Now, there is a tremendous difference between that and then telling the local group how to go about it. I think you have to get team- work. I was thinking when Mrs. Williams was answering your ques- tion, here is a woman, if she wa.nts to do it, who now clearly ought to have some way to go up the ladder, the vocational ladder, and become a professional librarian. Now, you will run into roadblocks all along the line here, because they will want here to take English composition I and II, or go to Vassar, or whatever it happens to be. The point is that she isn't going to do that, but she has the potential for becoming a wonderful librarian. Now, where is the training? I think the only way that this can be worked out is to get the library associations, get the library schools, get the local school system a.nd all of the forces that are involved, face them with the problem, and see if they can't work out ways. We almost always start off saying we can't, but then, if we really want. to, we. go ahead and do it., so I just. believe, that there is no easy way. You can't hand it over to one group or another. I think only-I was very much in sympathy with what. was said earlier by the monsignor or another member of that group of wit- nesses, in referring to the importance of team work for children at the local level. PAGENO="0411" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1233 Never mind all of these other factors. Let's get something done for the kids that need this help so desperately, and we need it that they get this help, because we are in trouble if they are not getting this help. Mr. Sciirti~. Congressman Carey. Mr. C~y. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Doctor, you have been up in a ringside seat in New York City on the happenings in that very important, very badly beset school system. I can recall meetings with superintendent groups in that system where it was made very clear that the entry of a teacher aid into the class- room had to be on such a basis that the volunteer effort was em- phasized, but under no conditions the replacement of the legally qualified and professionally qualified instructional personnel could be envisioned. In other words, for want of a better term, I will say that is a gantlet thrown down that the teacher aids will never get into the profession. She had better confine herself to removing galoshes and changing snowsuits, or handing out box lunches, or if she goes beyond that perimeter, look out. Now, how do you cure this? Mr. NIEMEYER. Well, earlier today I made mention that Dr. Klopf, who was here earlier, headed this study which Bank Street has been doing for the last couple of years for the OEO on the training of aids as that t.raining has been taking place experimentally around the country. I have been privileged to attend a number of the conferences to which Dr. Klopf and his colleagues have invited, oh, superintendents, all kinds of people from all over the country to discuss the problem. There have always been at these conferences members of the IJFT, which is the bargaining agent for the teachers in New York City, and the AFT and the NEA, and I have yet to hear any objections to teacher aids from that source. Now, I am sure that they would-and I would support them in this-object if we were saying that we thought that people even with Mrs. Williams' skills and feelings for children and her obvious capac- ity to relate to families and to communicate, if she now would dis- place a teacher who is teaching mathematics, or whatever it happens to be. She would not. want this, I am sure, because in teaching, a good teacher not only has love and these other skills., but has a craft, and teaching is a craft, as well as a love. So I don't see any conflict between these two. As Mrs. Williams also said this morning, no, no matter how good a teacher is, and even if you cut t.he class to 20, instead of 30, the teacher just. doe.s not. have enough time to go around. And the kinds of things that Mrs. Williams said that she did wit.h children, of reading to them, of what other ways do you help kids when you are in the classroom? Mrs. Wiu~~rs. Well, my~ Mr. CAREY. Let me throw this question, which is probably too sjmplist.lc., what do you do when the class gets to like the teacher aid better than it likes the teacher? PAGENO="0412" 1234 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. SCHEL~ER. Which, judging from Mrs. Williams, is more than a theoretical question. Mrs. WInLix~Ls. In a classroom, that would have no way of happen- ing, for the one reason, you look upon the teacher as the master teacher. I am in the role of aid or assistant, and I would never try to overstep my bounds as to being the master teacher. I fulfill my role, but never to overstep the professional. Mr. CAREY. Are we prepared to see that day when the number of teacher aids becomes such a matter of interest to the United Federa~ tion of Teachers that. t.hen they would be organized? Mrs. WILLIAMS. Well, they can be organized, but I don't think the day will come when they will overstep the professional. You see, the professionals have the paper and the degree for that position, and we dont have it.. Mr. MEMEYER. But we can't look into the future to that extent. Mrs. WILLIAMS. Not. t.hat far. Mr. CAnNY. Well, I am not going to continue with the line of ques- tioning, but I think it is always important t.o have a premonition, eit.he.r good or bad, and I am not one of those who believes you should ever encourage things to get off the ground unless they are going to move constructively toward an objective that we can apprehend as realistic for all the children, and this means that if teacher aides are good in one classroom, for one group of children, they are good for all the children of a large city school system. Therefore, we have to look at this in a dimension of something which is going to be a well-supported, comprehensive program of teacher aides supply and training and provision for all the children. Now if this is so, then we are talking about a second lead in the teac.hing profession, subprofessiona.l, it is true, but no more than an internist subprofessional, the aid is subprofessional. Therefore, if we embark upon this encouragement program and training program and support program for this kind of thing, we ought t.o envision all the possibilities and probabilities, and the clear probability to me is that we are setting up a copilot in t.he classroom. And I would remind the witnesses that copilots have stature of their own, and these persons would have a stature of t.heir own, and they are rightly entitled to it. Now, double teaming in the classroom may be a good idea. Prob- ably it. is a good idea, especially now that. one system I can think of, by this morning's reference in t.he prints, 16 teachers resigned. Hope- fully, the aides would be around, to maintain some sort of order and progression in that situation where the teacher is waiting to be re- placed. These are, to me, de.ep and gripping questions, as to what will t.end to support this second line of care and education and instructional service, and all comprehensive services for the children through the teacher aid profession, if I may use that term; so, is Bank Street pre- pared to carry this to that. degree? Are ou prepared to go all the way with set.ting up programs for teacher aides ill every classroom, in all tile schools that need it in the city? Mr. NIEMEYER. Oh, I think the schools of New York City would benefit. from this enormously; yes. Mr. CAREY. That isn't the question. The question is, Are you pre- pared to undertake it, or to have someone undertake it? PAGENO="0413" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1235 Mr. NIEMEYER. Yes. We would certainly do everything we could to help. Mr. CAREY. Is that board prepared to make a decision in this di- rection? Is the board prepared to buy this program? Mr. NIEMEYER. Which board, the board of education? Mr. CAREY. The board of education in New York City. Mr. NIEMEYER. 1 really don't know. They have a rather extensive aide program in New York City now which certainly has the board's approval, and I suppose active support. They are putting money into it., and it is a rather well-thought-out program, and the problems that you have raised, which while they are real possibilities, have really not occurred. You know, the aides supplanting the teacher just has not happened, that's all. And in many of our schools, we are going to have to have a much lower ratio of children to the adults, or we are not going to be able to teach them, and we don't have for the foreseeable future the trained teachers to provide that type of ratio. I think that's one of our problems. Mr. MEEDS. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. CAREY. I will yield to my colleague from Washington. Mr. MEEDS. Mr. Chairman, I have been looking just very briefly at the book which has been given us, "Teachers Education in Social Context," by Klopf and Bowman, and I would ask unanimous con- sent. that the titles of chapter 1, which I think presents pretty well the probleni, and chapters 8 and 9 he. inserted at this point, in the record immediately following the doctor's testimony. Mr. SCHEUTER. Following Dr. Niemeyer's testimony. Wnithout objection, it is so ruled. Mr. STEIGER. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. MEEDS. Yes. The gentleman from New York has the floor. Mr. CAREY. I will yield to my colleague. Mr. STEIGER. Would the gentleman yield? If it. is acceptable, I would ask unanimous consent, if it has not already been done, that this short report., "Auxiliary School Per- sonnel: Their Roles, Training, and Institutionalization" be inserted immediately following the insertions that the gentleman from `Wash- ington put in. Mr. SCHEUER. There being no object.ion, it is so ordered. Mr. CAREY. Well, reserving the right to object., what is the source of this report? Mr. STEIGER. This is by the Bank Street. College of Education, on behalf of the. Office of Economie. Opportunity. It is a short take- off from that which presents some of the concepts. It is also by Bow'- man and Klopf. Mr. CAREY. I withdraw the reservation. I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman. Mr. S0IIEUTER. Mr. Steiger. Mr. STEIGER. Dr. Nierneyer, may I just say that I ~liink your testimony and that of your colleagues, particularly your willingness to bring Mrs. Williams down here with you, has been outstanding. I am very much impressed by what you outlined for us. I really have only just a couple of short quest ions. PAGENO="0414" 1236 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS No. 1. do you or can you give us any indication as to whether or not you think her profession would have been of assistance had they been involved in the New York City situation that was in the press this morning, where the teachers resigned because of physical danger? Mr. N~~rEY~. Well, the problem that you refer to of the resigna- tion of the teachers over the lack of discipline in a particular school is really the outcome of a tremendously complex situation in the school, and I think that I would just-I would be very naive if I were to say that just the inclusion of teacher aides would make a difference in such a situation. I have not-this is a school that my colleagues have not been work- ing in, so I have no firsthand account. I do know, however, that my college is working in 25 elementary and junior high schools in Har- lem, and they are representative of the most educationally deprived schools in New York and Chicago, and all of the other big cities, and we have no situation of this kind. We are more concerned about the kind of protest which got crowded off the papers today, in which the parents of 125 and 36, 36 being a new school that is going to be the pri- mary branch of 125, which will be the upper school branch of the hyphenated school, the parents picketed the school on Thursday and Friday, and then withdrew and sent to temporary schools located in churches around 1,200 of the 1,800 children on Monday, and I didn't have any report of what happened yesterday. This is a protest over-and again it is an illustration of the compli- cations which a big school system faces. The protest is here, protest by parents. and I have met with them and at their invitation, and talked with them a number of times, and I met with them at a meeting with Dr. Donovan, who want simply to have a voice in interviewing and making a recommendation about. candidates who are the candi- dates on the list for the job of principal. They feel, these parents, that. unless the principal feels that the par- ents have some voice in the school, and unless they, the parents, have ha.d that voice, and thus have some confidence in the principal of t.he school, that. there c.ant. be a good school, and I think they are right. Now, I don't think that if you have that, it alone will give you a good school, hut. I don't see how you can have a really good school when the parents and the administration of a school do not have mutual respect. And so I am as troubled about that. as I am about resignations over people being slugged. Now, I don't like people being slugged; don't misunderstand me. Mr. STEIGER. You would contend, however, and perhaps Mrs. Wil- liams might wish to comment, that. the individual attention which a paraprofessional can give in assisting the professional teac.her can go a long way toward removing or alleviating some of these problems. Would you agree with that Mr. NIEMEYER. Well, I would say this, that the children in schools of this kind need, as I will just repeat what I said to Congressman Carey, they absolutely have to have more adults working with them than 1 per 30. .~ecor1cllv~ if thi~ does not happen, they are. not going to develop even the basic skills which must be developed in elementary school, and, PAGENO="0415" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTATTON AMENDMENTS 1237 thirdly, if the parents see that their children are not learning how to read, just the simplest elementary things which must be learned in elementary school, these parents are going to have no sense of con- fidence in the school. They then transmit that to the children. In addition, you see, it is very difficult for a child to feel very good about the world, and about himself, if he does not have any of the skills which he can see all around him are needed to compete in that world. If he feels that he is excluded, if he has no sense of mastery over his environment, and you get this through knowing something, and knowing how to do various things, so that we have this vicious interaction system set up, in which the lack of learning creates attitudes which are self-deprecating and then which are hateful toward other people. Then you get repressive discipline instead of supportive discipline that has to be introduced to keep things together, and I have had teach- ers tell me, many of them, that by the time these youngsters are up in the school, then the only way you can keep them quiet is by this con- stant-what I call negative discipline-so it is true that in some situa- tions, you have explosions, you have kids who hate the school, and hate teachers, and this is one of the greatest-and when von say that per- haps there are millions of kids like this, either in school or just coming out of those schools, you realize that we have a tremendously tragic situation and dangerous situation. Now, in all of that, I would say that the introduction of more adults and the only way you are going to get t.hem is either by the use of older students, or, and these are not mutually exclusive, or people like Mrs. Williams, this would be one little t.hing that can be done., but it is only one, and I would not present it here in any sense as a panacea., and I am sure Mrs. Williams would feel that way, too; is that right? Mrs. WilLIAMS. Definitely. Mr. STEIGER. You make the point, or Dr. Klopf makes the point in this presentation that. was given earlier. that it is important that the cooperation of 2-year and community colleges be sought in the development programs for auxiliaries. Is this, in your view-and I don't know what Mrs. Williams' background is- Mr. NIEMEYER. She is a high school graduate, I believe. Mrs. WILLIAMS. Yes. Mr. STEIGER. Do you think it should he both the high school gradu- ates and worl.dng toward getting more community college, jiiiiior col- lege people? Mr. NIEMEYER. I don't know what to say about the junior colleges. We are bringing representatives of junior colleges or community col- leges from various parts of the United States together this spring, at Bank Street or in some city in the United States and we will have a 2- or 3-day session, talking about this whole problem of the relation- ship of the junior college, both to t.heir graduates entering teaching, in various ways, and their modifying or modifying their program or enlarging their program so that people like Mrs. Williams can be brought in, and being up the job ladder, the career ladder. towa id a goal which is beyond the goal which she has already achieved. Mr. STEIGER. Mr. Chairman, if I may, I am through with my ques- tions, just simply say t.hat I think that the concept that Dr. Niemeyer, PAGENO="0416" 1238 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mrs. Williams, and Dr. Klopf have presented is a very exciting one. I think it is one that this committee and this Congress should explore further. Perhaps it is possible that we might even make some strides in opening the horizons that I think exist in the utilization of the paraprofessional. I commend Mrs. Williams for the work that she is doing. It is vital, very necessary, and I commend you, Dr. Nie- meyer, for being willing to come here today and for giving us the benefit of the background and experience that you have had in this field. I think you have done an outstanding job, and I am grateful that you came, grateful that you gave us a chance to hear from you. Mr. NIEMEYER. Thank you. Mrs. WILLIAMS. Thank you. Mr. SCHEUER. Well, Mr. Steiger just made my speech. All I can add is a ditto on it.. And I will add one question as a postscript, Dr. ~\ieinever. I-Ta villu observed the development, perli~tps the Topsy-like (leve~opnient of the teacher aide as an institution, can you give us any suggestions as to amendments or legislative direction that we can give to this rapidly growing field of activit.y, either insofar as training of the aide is colleerlle(l. or the orientation of the profession ? Can you give us some guidelines that. we might include in the legislation, or in the legislative history of this bill? Mr. ~IEMrYER. Well. I believe that out of the study which we referred to, various criteria for guidelines are beginning to emerge, or have emerged. I think it. would be-I would be very glad t.o ask my colleagues to prepare some kind of a document. Dr. Bowman is coming down on Saturday to testify; whether she could have some- thing like that drawn up before Saturday or not, I don't know, but I am sure that. it can be done rapidly, and the st.udy isn't over yet, so we are a little bit reluctant to say this is the definitive list, but I am sure that we would he only too happy to pass on anything that we think is worth passing on to you. Mr. ~CTTEfER. Well, thank von very much, and I will just append my (litto mark to Mr. Ste.iger's fine statement.. Mr. NIEMEYFR. We appreciate very much this opportunity. Mr. ScIIEUER. We appreciate your coming down to this committee. Thank you from the bottom of our hearts. (The followin~ material wa.s submitted by Mr. Niemeyer for the record:) A COMPOSITE PI(TFRE OF FIFTEEN DEMONSTRATION TRAINING PROGRAMS FOR AUXILIARY ScHoor~ PERSONNEL CONDUCTED IN 1966 Yo ine ever liStene(l to me before." said a trainee in a Project to Prepare Trachcr Aides for Working with Disadvantaged Children conducted by the Department of Education. San Juan Regional Office in Puerto Rico. Under- standably, this auxiliary-participant in the Summer Institute became an effec- tive "listener" in one-to-one or small group relationships with pupils in the practicum' classroom, applying to her work with children in an economically deprived section of San Juan the insights she had gained as to the art of listen- ing and the joy of being heard. In the practicum, she, like the 49 other auxiliary participants, w-as teamed with a teacher who was himself a participant in the Institute. These 50 teacher-auxiliary teams experimented together in 50 sep- arate classes, with the auxiliary performing a variety of functions related to 1 Practlcum is defined as a sustained supervised training experience with children in an actual educational setting. PAGENO="0417" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1239 the learning-teaching process and the teacher playing a triple role: (1) as teacher of the class, (2) as guide to the auxiliary, and (3) as a learner, luinseif, in terms of effective utilization of the auxiliaries' services. Later, in group counseling sessions, teachers and auxiliaries reviewed their experiences in the classroom and explored the meanings as well as the possible values of their new roles and relationships. At the University of Maine's Project to Traia Au~iliary School Personnel (Tcacher-Aid~es) in connection with i'\DEA Institute br AdranCed Study for Teachers of Disadvantaged C/i ildeen. listening was also an important function of the auxiliaries, who were mothers receiving Aid to I)ependent Children. One pupil in the practicuin was heard by a visiting consultant telling an auxiliary about his frustrations in class. The auxiliary was able to interpret the experi- ence to the boy, and the boy's problems to the staff. Sonie aspects of his com- plaints were considered by staff and resulted in programmatic changes. In the Pilot Program to Train. Teacher Aides, conducted l)y the Detroit Public Schools, a spirit of openness to new ideas was evident. Auxiliaries had been used for two years in this school system but the policies restricted their utiliza- tion to clerical, custodial an(l monitorial functions. The teacher auxiliary teams in the Institute were told. in effect. to throw out the "rule book" during the practicum, and to explore just how far they could go in involving the auxiliaries in the learning-teaching process with benefit to the pupils. The teacher- l)articipants, though willing to put aside the rule hook, had to deal with their own not-too-covert fear of auxiliaries usurping the professional's role in the classroom. The director, and the school system supporting him. guaranteed professional standards while the auxiliary appeared not only to understand the flee(l for guarantees based on role differentiation. hut openly expressed their desire for maintaining clear lines of role definition. "We work as a team," said one auxiliary. "with the teacher having authority an(l responsibility, like the head of a firm or the captain of a ship." In Berkeley. California. (luring the Project on Teacher Education and Parent- Teacher Aides in. a Culturally Different Community, an aide reported, "One day I went to a child as T had been doing every day since coming to the classroom almost a month ago, to give him help in reading certain words. The child gave me a beautiful smile-one I'll never forget-and said proudly. `I don't need you any more.' He was on his own. He knew I w'ould be there if he needed me. He now felt sure enough to work by himself." The child who is present phys- ically hut completely absent mentally during the independent work period often needs the presence of a concerned adult to help him use the time for such study most profitably. Such a function was performed by aides this autumn in the Berkeley Unified School District schools serving disadvantaged children. These projects were four of the US demonstration trainin~ programs financed by the Office of Economic Opportunity and coordinated by Bank Street Colle~e of Education as part of its nation-wide Study of Auxiliary Personnel in Education. The programs were studied in two groups: the preservice group comprising nine programs with preservice training only, and the inservicp group compris- ing six programs with a very brief preservice program followed by an extended program in the regular school situation. All nine preservice programs were of the "institute" type-that is to say they enrolled small groups of I)articipants to work intensively for a relatively short period of time (two to eight weeks). SPONSORS OF PRESERVICE PROGRAMS 5P0N50R5 OF IN5ERVICE PROGRAMS (With brief preservice component) Commonw-ealth of Puerto Rico. Denartment of Education Ball State University Detroit Public Schools Berkeley Unified School System G~irland Junior College howard University Jackson State College Ohio University New York University San Fernando Valley State College Northern Arizona University Southern Illinois University University of California at Riverside University of Maine University of South Florida 75-49~--G7--pt. 2--~--27 PAGENO="0418" 1240 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS COMMON AIMS AND ELEMENTS 1)espite the broad range of geographical distribution and I)rOgramlnatic varia- tions, it is possible to draw a composite picture of the demonstration programs suite they all share has it objectives and have certain elements in common, such as : 1) The anxilia ry-participants in all projects were selected wholly or iii lirge inca sure from those at or below the poverty level : 2) Every program corn- bined theoretical instruction with learning through experience in a practicum or regular school classroom : 3) All projects were committed to experiment with auxiliaries in new functions which were directly related to the learning- teaching process rather than functions which were indirectly related to instruc- tion. such as simile clerical tasks: 4) There WOS pre-planning with the local school systems in every case so as to assure employment for the auxiliaries who satisfactorily cOllhl)lete(l the training program, and to gear the training to the needs of time school system I though not to lose the vitality and growth components in this recognition of reality requirements) ; 5) Every project had a research director on its staff and included a component of self-evaluation iii its progr:mnl: 6i All were funded by the Office of Economic Opportunity and were coordinated under time Bank Street College of Education Study of Auxiliary Personnel in Education. These mutual elements were requirements for funding by the O.E.O. in this matrix of demonstration training projects. At work conferences for project directors convened by Bank Street College of Education, these common elements were fused into one basic purpose, which undergirded their diverse but coopera- ti ye activities. i.e. "To formulate hypotheses as to principle and practices which appear to be effective in actual practice for the 1. role definition and development 2. training 3. institutionalization of auxiliary personnel as part of the learning- teaching process." To develop the role of the auxiliary as an integral and contributive factol? in American education required an understanding of the whole complex of roles, responsibilities, and relationships involved in the learning-teaching process. Consequently, in the Work Conference for Directors, prior to the completion of project proposals, there was consensus that teachers and administrators had a great deal to learn as well as to give in these training programs. In nine of the 15 programs, therefore, teachers were enrolled as participants to work with auxiliaries in the classroom; to explore role possibilities not only for auxiliaries but also for themselves, in terms of new and more complex professional roles in an aided teaching situation; to evaluate their experiences; and to plan for more effective utilization of auxiliaries in the future. In the projects where there was dual participation (teachers and auxiliaries), role development was facilitated. in the opinion of staff and participants alike. The principal dflemma appeared to be the conflict between role definition which was recognized as necessary to institutionalization, and role development which was a dynamic of each classroom situation where auxiliaries were utilized. The degree of responsibility assigned to an auxiliary is dependent upon the interaction f a particular teacher and a particular auxiliary operating within a given struc- ture and responding to the special needs of individual pupils. A delicate balance seems to be required in order to provide the specificity that means security along with the flexibility that promotes growth. In those six 2 projects in which there was a component of group counseling for participants built into the program, there appeared to be far less fear on the part of teacher-participants that standards w-ere threatened by the introduction of non-certified personnel into the classroom. In counseling sessions, teachers tended to recognize and understand their feelings of being somewhat threatened by the presence of another adult in the classroom, and to begin to develop some inner strength to cope with this insecurity. In some programs, administrators also attended as learners and planners for at least a portion of the training-a significant addition not only to the training lirorrarn. hut to ultimate institutionalization. 2 Bc-rketey, Howard. Jackson. Maine. Puerto Rico, and Riverside. PAGENO="0419" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1241 Within the broad framework of common objectives and similar approaches, there was wide variety of programmatic design in the matrix of demonstration programs. The needs and composition of potential auxiliaries in various com- munities, the diverse policies of local school systems with respect to the utiliza- tion of auxiliaries, the available facilities and resources for training, and the nature and extent of cooperation in the institutional life of the area all had an impact upon the training program. Variations were in such matters as: sponsorship, pre-plauning, recruitment, selection, the composition of the participant group, the specific skills for which auxiliaries were trained, instructional content and process, and methods of process observation and feedback. These various elements of program structure are described below, indicating both the common features and those which were idiosyncratic. Sponsoring The sponsorship of these institutes was by institutions of higher learning with the exception of three l)rojects: Detroit. Puerto Rico, and Berkeley. In these three, the local school system was the sponsoring agency. Wayne State Univer- sity was involved in the Detroit program on a consultative basis; in Puerto Rico some members of the University of Puerto Rico held important positions on the project staff; in Berkeley, the University of California School of Criminology conducted the research component of the project; in the Ball State University irogram, involving four school systems, the planning and implementation were in the hands of the individual systems, with the University acting as catalyst. In the Howard University program, the Model School Division of the District of Columbia public school system was deeply involved in the planning and opera- tion. Pre-Planning Pre-planning for the training programs was initiated by the sponsoring in- stitution with school administrators, local Community Action Agencies, and occa- sionally with representatives of other appropriate agencies, such as the Bureau of Indian Affairs in Northern Arizona. The components of pre-planning. includ- ing number of meetings, heirarchical level of involvement on the part of co- operating institutions or agencies, areas of concern explored, and degree of agree- ment reached, varied greatly from program to program. This coordination of training and employment was most thorough and most easily accomplished when it could be achieved intramurally, as in Detroit, Puerto Rico, and Berkeley, where the school system was the sponsor. In the other cases, coordination was facilitated when a sponsoring institution of higher learning had previously formed extensive contacts with school systems, either through working relation- ships involving placement of student teachers or through other services rendered by the college or university to the system. In only one instance-lJniversity of South Florida-the university sponsor was not able to gain cooperation from the local school system. In this case, the University then arranged with the local Catholic diocese to utilize parochial schools in the practicum. In all cases, the purpose of the pre-planning was to work out appropriate methods of recruitment and selection of trainees, to explore the roles of teachers and auxiliaries in the local school systems so that an appropriate and realistic training program could he developed, to secure commitment for employment, and to agree on areas of responsibility. At Ball State University the project staff worked closely with the superin- tendent and principals of four Indiana school systems. In other situations initial overtures to school systems or Community Action Agencies had to be made. Such was the case in Ohio University where the program was involved with Head Start Programs in ten different localities in two states. Still another approach was used in Main where liaison was established with local school sys- tems. with the State Department of Health. Education, and Welfare, and with the Maine Teachers Association. mind where a week-long conference w-as held with school administrators. Some local situations precluded the sponsoring institution's working with the school system because the latter had a policy of not employing auxiliary per- sonnel in the classroom. In Boston such a situation existed at the time of the Institute (later modified), so Garland .Tunmor College developed a Leadership Institute prior to the program for prel)mII;m tion of auxilia ries. The purpose of the PAGENO="0420" 1242 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Leadership Institute was to involve local educational leadership from the corn- munity at large, from day-care centers, Head Start programs, and other Com- munity Action programs and agencies in exploration of role development, train- ing, and institutionalization of auxiliary personnel, as well as to contribute their experience and ideas for pre-planning of the auxiliaries' training program. In most programs there was also internal pre-planning involving the staff of the institute. In some instances, such as at the University of California Exten- sion at Riverside, San Fernando Valley State College, and Northern Arizona University. the staff met together for a period of time varying from a weekend to one week, to establish working procedures, discuss the overall approach to learning, and plan the details of the program. Most programs did not have consecutive days allocated to staff pre-planning. Rather, this was accomplished on a more informal basis in a series of separate meetings of the staff prior to the opening of the program. Reci-nitnient and ~c1ection The plans for recruitment and selection as formulated during the pre-planning sessions varied considerably. In five programs the recruitment of auxiliary trainees followed the regular patterns of the school systems involved in the insti- tutes either as sponsors or eventual employers of the auxiliaries) usually by direct contact through the principal or teachers with the additional involvement of the local Community Action Program Agency (CAP). In two cases, Detroit and New- York University. those persons who had already served as school-aides and ShOwe(l potential for training as teacher-aides were recruited. In Riverside all recruitment was done through the Community Action Programs exclusively. In Maine. mothers receiving Aid to Dependent Children were informed of the program by their social workers. The Navaho auxiliaries, in Northern Arizona, were recruited through the Bureau of Indian Affairs, radio announcements, and word-of-mouth publicity on the reservation. The availability of programs at Ohio University and in Puerto Rico w-ere made known to the classes of local high schools by their principals or guidance counselors. Mass media were used in almost every project to supplement other forms of recruitment. In St. Petersburg. Florida, the program was for migrants and so recruitment was accomplished both locally through CAP groups and through the Florida State Department of Education. The project at Southern Illinois University recruited part of its participants from the Neighborhood Youth Corps. In the Howard University project, recruitment of high school students in the third and fourth track (slow' students) w-as carried out by the principal of the Cardozo High School which was the only source of the student participants. Applicants were usually screened through personal interviews. When time precluded this personalized selection procedure, its omission was regretted by those involved in the selection. Only one program, San Fernando Valley State College. had no responsibility for recruitment or selection of trainees. An addi- tional handicap w-as placed on this program in training auxiliaries since often the program staff did not know- either the number of trainees or anything of their background until the trainees arrived for the orientation program. Academic requirements for the auxiliaries in all programs covered a wide range. The minimum requirement was six years of elementary school. The maximum was some college experience. Other factors most frequently con- sidered in selection were: ability to work with other people, concern for children, and enthusiasm for the work at hand. Although In six projects-Garland Junior College. University of Maine, Jackson State College, University of Southern Illinois, University of South Florida and Berkeley-the auxiliary- trainees w-ere all female, only Garland made it a requirement. This regulation w-as because residence in the college dormitory was included in this program. It was at Garland that there was a considerable proportion of middle- and upper-class auxiliary trainees, with a majority of low-income participants. Tn Detroit, New York University. and Ball State University, preference was given to those auxiliary candidates who planned to return to employment in the school system for the regular school year. The racial and ethnic groups to w-hich the auxiliaries belonged were varied, including Negroes, Puerto Ricans. Mexican-Americans, Cubans. Navaho Indians, fl~troit. Ball State. Berkeley. Jackson and New York. PAGENO="0421" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1243 and others. One particularized group consisted of low-income persons in Ap- palachia (predominantely white). Migrant workers were another particular- ized group. The geographical distribution for the Ui projects was broad, cover- ing the states of Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Maine, Massa- chusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, New York, Ohio, and West Virginia as well as the Conimonwealth of Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia. Recruitment and selection of the teacher-participants were usually done by principals in whose schools the institute practicuin would be conducted, or by principals whose teachers would be working with auxiliaries during the school year. In Maine and Northern Arizona, where the project was conducted jointly by ah NDEA Institute for Advanced Study for Teachers of Disadvantaged Youth, the teachers in the NDEA Institute were the teacher-participants in that project. In the four programs w-hich included administrator-participants as well as teachers and auxiliaries-Northern Arizona University. University of Maine, Ball State University, and Southern Illinois University-the administrators were recruited through personal contacts made by the program staff, through mass media, and through the distribution of brochures announcing the availa- bility of the program. Re8idential facilities Some interesting variations were evident in the type of residential facilities which w-ere made available in the different programs. Garland Junior College provided opportunity for a cross-class, cross-culture, racially integrated exper- ience. A salient feature of this plan was that some middle-class Negroes were included as well as some low-income Caucasians. In Maine. the mothers re- ceiving Aid to Dependent Children and their children were housed in a campus fraternity house. The migrant auxiliaries in the South Florida program lived in one dormitory on the Bay Campus. At Ohio University, which offered a summer institute and a year-long program. the high school auxiliary-trainees and their college student sponsors lived in campus dormitories during the six-week campus phase of the program. The high school students then returned to live at their homes for the remainder of the program. The college student sponsors found their own housing in the communities of their high school student advisees during the four-week practi- cum phase of the program, returning to the campus in the fall to continue their academic training. Instructional co~mtcnt Notable similarities and differences appeared in the instructional components of the institutes. In almost every program auxiliary-participants and teachers. in those programs involving teacher-participants, received instruction in the philosophy of education, child development (often quite specifically the psy- chology of the disadvantaged child), and the general goals and procedures of the local school system. These substantive areas were covered in lectures or seminars. In most programs, the participants, 1)0th professional and nonprofes- sional, met as a group for some portion of this academic instruction. At Detroit and Puerto Rico instruction was directed to the auxiliaries exclusively. wit.h the teachers attending as observers so that they w-ould he aw-are of w-hat the auxiliaries were learning. Instruction in specific skills for the auxiliaries usually included typing, record keeping, use of audio-visual equipment, and the skills needed in assisting with reading, games, and creative activities, such as music and art. Basic com- munication skills were stressed. In the How-ard University project, special skill training in physical care was provided for health aides. In most cases the decision to offer instruction in these skills was based on the functions for which the auxiliaries were being I)rePared: and this, in turn, was influenced by hut riot restricted completely to the current policy of the local school system in the use of auxiliaries. In a few instances, the instruction was given in response to a request by many of the auxiliaries. The Jackson State College auxiliaries, for example, derived such personal satisfaction from the clerical skills instruction that they asked for further guidance in related matters like working effectively with people and personal grooming. The teacher-partici- pants in many programs assisted in the instructional program by tutoring in the evening, especially when the auxiliaries were studying to pass high school equiv- alency examinations. The teachers, on several occasions, remarked that they PAGENO="0422" 1244 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS were surprise(l at finding that the auxiliaries had such desire and capacity for knowledge. The teachers also recognized and remarked that their surprise came from stereotype(1 misconceptions about people who had experienced economic or educati( nal deprivation. Practicuin Or regular 8(/(00! erperienee Opportunity to integrate substantive learning and innovative practice was pro- vided in the I)racticulil which was (lefined as a sustained, supervised experience with children in an actual educational setting. In approximately half of the programs the particiPants worked together in the practidum as teacher-auxiliary teams. In the other programs the auxiliaries worked under the guidance of a demonstration teacher who was not. however, a participant in the program. Only at Berkeley. .Jackson State College. and Ball State University did some of the teachers and auxiliaries who were to work together during the school year have an opportunity to work together in the practicuni asa team, although this was a goal of all programs. At Berkeley and Southern Illinois the aides began working ininiediately in the classrooms with the teachers to w-hoin they were assigne(l all year. There were variations in the length of the daily l)ractidum. Most lasted from two to three hours iii the niorlling. Four-Garland Junior College. Ohio Univer- sitv. Southern Illinois University. and San Fernando Valley State College- In sted for the entire school day. Three of these were prekiiiderga rten programs. The Southern Illinois University program was in an elementary school. At Garland. half the participants took part in the practicurn while the other half were in classes at the college : then the groups reversed assignments. In Detroit, where the teachers were assigned to classes in the system~s sunnier school pro- gram for the whole itiorning. the auxiliaries worked in the practicuin with them for only one hour. in South Florida the aides worked in the I)racticUnl a half day only. The grade levels of the Iracticums ranged from prekiiidergai'teIl through high sch ol. hut the central tendency was toward prekiiiderga rten and eleitentary. I )etroit was the only program that included high school and only two programs included junior high school pupils : l)etroit and Maine. At Riverside some junior high school students worked with younger children in an experiment in cross- a ~e teaching. Only iii N rtherii Arizona and Riverside were ungraded groupings used. Of the lres(hol programs, four were for Head Start children. Great variety was evidenced in the organization of the practicumn. Several programs used the local svsteimis regular summer school sessions (New York University. Ball State University. Detroit. and Riverside). In Puerto Rico, Northern Arizona University. and .Tackson State College. special practicum (lasses were set up for the institute. 111(1 parents were asked to send their chil- lien. In Northern Arizona the children were Navahos from the reservation aiid had to he housed in a Bureau of Indian Affairs dormitory while they attended the school in which the practicum was located. Ohio University and San Fer- iiando Valley State C (liege used head Start Centers as practicums and Garland Juiiior College used day-(alnl( operated by the Associated Day Care Centers, Inc. In the Ma i iie program, the pra eticum was for the children of the auxiliary- participants. Pa rochial schools in St. Petersburg provided the practicum setting for the University of South Florida. Public school classes during the regular 5(11001 year served as the practicum for Berkeley. Howard awl Southern Illinois. Iii aijiost every instance in the summer programs there were fewer children in each pract~iimii class than there are normally registere(l in a class during the school year. The enrollment in these progranis ranged from seven in Maine to pproximately 20 in (lost programs. The small classes provided an opportunity to expei'inlellt with innovative techniques. The directors believed that the experi- ences cOlll(I be transferred to larger classes during the school year. after princi- ]leS 011(1 promising practices had been formulated in the experimental settings. The four year-lon~ programs used actual operating classrooms varying in size from 1 `i to 47 students. In tile summer programs where children attended practicums which were not part of the system's regular summer school program, the projects found it necessary to modify the content and methods used in the classes, offering some vacation-type activities as well as the regular or remedial instruction originally Ilannell. in order to niaintain steady attendance. Most practicuIn~ provided experience for auxiliaries with many tasks in a variety of situations. It was the intention of each project staff that auxiliaries PAGENO="0423" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1245 should be prepared for soiiietliiiig flare than the roiltilie custodial, clerical, or nionitorial functions ofteic assigiied to such personnel. The visitation teams found auxiliary-participants engaged in a wide range of activities, related to instruction, from working on a one-to-one basis with a child in remedial reading, to reviewing tests with large groups of pupils. Supervision of the practicuni was carried out in a number of ways, the most common of which was to have project staff supervisors and/or instructors schedule visits to the practicum classes for the purpose of observation and conferences with the auxiliaries and teachers. At New York University this procedure was supplemented by having each auxiliary keep a daily log of l)raC- ticum experiences which the staff read and commented on, and which was used as the basis of seminar discussions. A critical training factor was the provision for scheduled time for the teacher and auxiliary teams to plan and evaluate their practicum experience together. Detroit developed a comprehensive procedure for such conferences . For an hour and a half following the practicuni this team sat down together to review- that day's experience. At this time, the teacher and the auxiliary wrote out their observations of the day's experience and analyzed it. Then the teacher wrote out the next clay's program and discussed it with the auxiliary in terms of his responsibilities, Copies of these plans and analyses were given to the project staff who used them to guide the design of seniinars. At the University of Maine. daily analysis and planning of the practicum took another form. There, several teachers and several auxiliaries operated in a single practicum classroom. This group met immediately following the practicuni with a staff advisor for a seminar on the day's experiences and plans for the following day. At Berkeley, time for planning and evaluation together by each teacher and his tw-o aides w-as built into the program. Children leave school at 2 :30 at Berkeley, and the 2 :30 to 3 :10 period w-as earmarked for such meetings. In practice however, 1)0th teachers and aides reported that it was seldom possible to use this time in the manner planned. Parent-teacher conferences and staff meetings were often scheduled then. In the eight programs where teacher-trainees were included among the par- ticipants, the practicum appeared to be particularly productive in terms of teacher-auxiliary relationships. Conversely, in those programs where no teacher- trainees were included, the directors frequently expressed regret that their pro- grams lacked this component, the auxiliaries in group interview-s spoke of the need for more interaction w-ith the teachers in the practicum and the visiting teams noted the difference in mutual understanding and trust between profes- sionals and nonprofessionals as they w-orked together. To the team members the inclusion of teacher-trainees appeared to be the pivotal feature of most progranis. Instructional process A variety of processes w-as employed by the individual institutes to facilitate learning for both professionals and nonprofessionals. Group counseling sessions with auxiliaries, teachers, and staff members meeting separately were utilized by Puerto Rico, Garland Junior College, Howard University, University of Maine, and San Fernando Valley State College to help participants deal with their personal needs. At the University of Southern Illinois small groups of auxil- iaries, teachers, and principals met together for group counseling. The Riverside program was the only one to conduct daily sensitivity training sessions in the belief that both teachers and auxiliaries could learn about themselves as persons from the frank reactions of other participants, and could also learn to use them- selves more effectively in the educative I)I'Ocess through this experience. At Riverside, self-evaluation was also fostered by viewing and discussing video tapes of the various sessions, both of the practicum and of the seminars. A variation of the T-Group was employed at Berkeley hut the meetings were held only once a week. All projects except Riverside used lectures, most of w-hich were given by project staff. Jackson State College and Detroit invited guest lecturers to speak to the participants. Films were used by almost all of the projects. At Garland Junior College a film made during the previous year's aide training institute was used. A notable use of film was in the University of South Florida project where "Harvest of Shame", a film on migrants, was used with the participants PAGENO="0424" 1246 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS who were themselves of niigrant background, but before viewing the film they were reluctant to admit this background. The showing of the film made such an impact on theni that they began to reveal more of their identification with migrants in order to discuss the film. Other frequently used instructional proc- esses included buzz sessions, role playing, and panel discussions among par- ticipants. Individual conferences as well as group meetings were a feature of the Garland program. Jackson State College set up a number of committees on which all participants were encouraged to serve. The residential nature of the program facilitated individual and small group counseling, on an informal basis, at Southern Illinois University. Field trips were used in a number of ways. Sometimes they were arranged for children in the practicurn and participants. The purposes varied. Some field trips to local institutions and social agencies locally were designed to enhance participants' understanding of the problems of the disadvantaged and to inform them of community resources for coping with these problems. Other field trips were specifically designed to supplement the participants' cultural or historical backgrounds. It was soon discovered in all the programs that strategies were necessary to assure frank and thoughtful feedback relevant to the changing needs of the trainees. In almost every project the relationships which the staff established with the participants provided an atmosphere in which both auxiliaries and professionals felt free to discuss their experiences and their needs. Some pro- grams provided formal structures for communicating this information to the staff. Conferences, group discussions among staff and participants were set up to this end. Some programs relied on the use of logs written by participants. Northern Arizona University instituted a suggestion box, while the University of Maine and Jackson State College had a newspaper prepared by trainees. The record on film of the video-taped sessions provided a unique form of feedback in Maine and Riverside. At Ohio University the use of college students as sponsors of the high school auxiliaries provided a link between the staff and the trainees. The college students discussed their observations in seminars with the staff. At Howard University. the group counseling sessions were open-ended, and suggestions on programmatic changes were welcomed. Every 1)roject had some form of process observation which contributed to the feedback. In most cases one or two persons were employed as process observers for the whole project. This was the case in Northern Arizona University, Puerto Rico. San Fernando Valley State College, Ball State University, Detroit, New York University. Southern Illinois University and Berkeley. In other programs staff instructors served as process observers for other classes and meetings. Staff in Garland Junior College, the University of Maine, and Jackson State College reported that observation of others' classes was particularly useful in achieving integrated instruction since the entire staff was aware of what was being presented by other instructors and of the reactions of the participants to this material. Riverside's unusual and more complex approach involved junior high school students as process observers. Midway through the program, those pupils found to be most effective as observers were retained in the role, while those less effective were assigned other functions. Only one program arranged for a daily staff meeting: Northern Arizona Uni- versity. The project staff reported these meetings were most useful in "putting out fires before they became conflagrations." Other programs, however, had frequent informal meetings of part or all of the staff for consultation and dis- (ussion of current issues. or weekly meetings. At Howard University, monthly staff meetings for project staff with appropriate faculty of the high school in which the project was operating proved valuable. IMPRESsIONS OF TIlE PROGRAM FROM VARIOUS POINTS OF VIE\V The programs were analyzed from within and by outside observers. The self- evalilation was conducted by process observers drawn from instructional staff and research staff. Participants also recorded their reactions. For outside evaluation, each program was visited by a team of three consultants for two days. The chairman of each visitation team posed a series of searching questions in group interviews with each group of participants, and with instructional PAGENO="0425" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1247 staff. To the question: "What is the responsibility of the auxiliary in a class- room?", an unequivocal answer came through in all the projects from the aux- iliaries themselves-"To hell) the teacher teach." To the follow-up question: "What, then, is teaching?", the answers tended to come more slowly. 1)0th from the auxiliary-participants and the teacher-participants, meeting separately. *The hesitation of the latter group may have stemmed froimi the difficulty of adjust- ing to a more complex and important level of professionalism with emphasis upon diagnosis, program planning. and leadership functions. It appears that teachers, by and large, have not yet been 1)repared either by colleges of teacher education or in-service training programs to orchestrate other adults in the class- room, since this is a relatively new responsibility for those in the teaching profession. In the group interviews, the teacher-participants tended to view this new function not as a substitute for direct contact with the pupils but as a I)oSitive factor in teacher-pupil relations. Teachers defined this as fi'eeing the teacher from many routine and time-consuming duties and by providing more opportu- nity for differentiated education to meet individual needs of pupils. These reactions were apparent even among teachers in the practicurn who were not enrolled in the training program, as they became more comfortable about the unusual experience of having another adult in the classroom. The possible threat of such a situation appeared to be effectively relieved and a con- tinuing process of role development for auxiliaries appeared to be established when teacher-auxiliary teams as co-participants had an opportunity for daily evaluation of their experience together. This process was facilitated when in- dividual and/or group counseling was also available to help participants cope with their personal needs as they adjusted to a new situation. Several attitudinal changes were perceived by observers within and outside the projects alike, which appeared to have direct reltaionship to the training experience: 1) the auxiliaries reported a new feeling of confidence. hope and aspiration; 2) the teacher-participants in most of the projects expressed a change in their image of poor people which paralleled and reinforced the improved self-image of the auxiliaries themselves: 3) 1)0th types of l)articipants agreed that low-income auxiliaries could facilitate communication with pupils and their parents in economically disadvantaged neighborhoods. even to the point of elicit- ing a twinge of jealousy on the part of some of the teacher-participants: and 4) there was general agreement among the teachers and auxiliaries that the latter could, when trained and encouraged to do so. contribute to the learning-teaching process, and that their activities should not be restricte(l to routine clerical or custodial functions provided the selection criteria utilized were consistent w-ith a broad role concept. The extent of involvement in the learning-teaching process depended upon the ability and potential of the auxiliaries. \lost projects picked the, cream of the cr01) in this experimental type of program. Only Howard University and Ohio University made an effort. to reach potential drop-outs. Finally, there appeared to be consensus among the various ol)servers of the programs that a realistic appraisal and interpretation of the policy, needs and expectations of the local school system with respect to the utilization of auxiliaries was essential to prevent false hopes, leading to frustration. but that realism regarding employment opportunities does not need to connote defeatism. They saw role development as a dynamic and continuing process in which professionals, nonprofessionals, educational institutions, and the community all have a re- sponsibility. In cases where pre-service training was followed by on-the-job experience, institutionalization was facilitated. SUMMARY The elements in the demonstration training programs which were identified by visitation teams as particularly effective in implementing project goals were: (1) Cooperative planning by school systems. institutions of higher learning, community action agencies, professional associations, instructional staff and participants. (2) Skill training which is realistic in terms of local employment opportunities. but also geared to future potentialities in the utilization of auxiliary personnel by the local school system. PAGENO="0426" 1248 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS (3) Inclusion of both auxiliaries and teachers in the trainee group, preferably as teams from a given school-teams that will work together in an actual school situation after the training. (4) Scheduled time for daily analysis of their practicum experience by the teacher-auxiliary teams, and team planning for the next class situation based on this evaluation. (5) Instructional content in foundations of child development, inter-personal relations, the life conditions of disadvantaged pupils, and the school as an insti- tution. ((3) Basic education in communication and language arts as well as skill training in technical and service operations such as typing, record keeping and operation of audio-visual equipment. (7) Availability of individual and/or group counseling to help participants deal with their own personal needs. PROFILE OF A PROGRAM FOR TEACHER EDUCATION AND PARENT-TEACHER SIDES IN A CULTURALLY DIFFERENT COMMUNITY (Sponsored by Berkeley Unified School District, Berkeley, Calif.) Of the 115,000 I)eople living in Berkeley one-third are Negro. Most Negroes live in the south and west section of the city. To be found there are the con- ditions of ghetto life, including poverty, physical and social separation from the white majority, and the web of family and social habits and attitudes that constitute a culture of its own. It was in two schools of that part of the city that the Teacher Education and Parent-Teacher Aides in a Culturally Different Community program was initiated October 24, 1966, with the intention of carry- ing it through the entire school year. Teachers in the schools of such low income minority communities are often strangers to the families living there; the teach- ers are the culturally different ones to the children, bringing to them for a few hours of every week-day another culture-the subculture of the school. One intent of this program was to sensitize teachers to the life style, the lilmigitilge. 1 mid tile c11(erIls)f the pareilts and children aSsociate(T with the school. Additionally, it was iiieant to nlodify the parents' perceptions of child rearing, of learning, and of the school. Plans of tile project were both psycho- logically and socially oriented. Confidence in the proposal was reinforced by assurance of cooperation from the Berkeley Unified School District and tile Uni- versity of California at Berkeley. PURPOSE S In the words of tile director of the project, "The purposes of the program \vei'e : 1) reduce tile alieiiation of l)arellts and teachers to the school : to open channels of communication between the home and the school; to decrease the degree of polarization between parents' and teachers' views of how to reward and punish. how to teach. how- children develop intellectually and socially; and to raise parents' educational aspirations for their children and possibly for themselves. Styles of school and home are so polarized that the child finds it extremely difficult to adjust to such different styles daily. This program is also based on the prenhise that the child has two sets of teachers, those in school and those at home. 011(3 that tile more alike their styles are the iiiore effective and efficient the school will be. "It is believed that these differences in style are traumatic to the child and have a negative effect upon the child's emotional, social, and academic adjust- ment to the school. It is hoped this program will improve his ability to work and play with other children in the school setting. The school is seen as an illstrument for social change, and the classroom is the place where parents, as aides. amid tea(llem'~ cami actively alter each other's perceptions, attitudes and bell a vior.'' COMPOSITION OF THE PARTICIPANT GROFP Time program design provided for two major dimensions, the first involving the use of teacher-aides in the elementary school classrooms. The second in- eluded the use of mleigilborboodl workers employed to establish a communication PAGENO="0427" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1249 link between school, home and community. In each of the two schools, Columbus and Lincoln, ten teachers were involved-a total of 20 teachers in the program. Each teacher had two aides, making 20 aides for each school, or 40 in all. In each school the program included four neighborhood workers, eight in the total group, constituting a total participant group of 68 individuals. METhODS OF SELECTION AND RECIiCITMENT Following detailed discussion of the proposed teaehel'-ai(le program with the faculties of the two schools, teachers were invite(i to volunteer to participate in the program. Teachers of kindergarten through sixth gra(le were selected, and in selection the attempt was made to obtain a rel)leselltative balance in experience, ethnic and racial backgrounds. In line with objective of reduciiig the differences in methods used by parents aiid teachers iii both teaching and relating to children, a major criterion was that the teacher-aides and neighbor- hood ~vrkers he parents of children in the school, and also be residents of that attendaiice district. Other requirements were that aides selected be members of families of low income, be wholesome people who can establish rapport with children and a(iults, and be willing to abide l)y rules of the school district. No educational standards were required in view of the several purposes involved in the plan : to Produce changes in the styles of rearing children on the part of the parents, to increase the ability of parents in helpiiig children in school, to in- crease the teachers' knowledge about families of the children in their classes. and to increase honest and frequent commuhli('ation between teachers and parents. To advertise the positions, job descriptions were distril)ute(l to community organizations and local stores by the Economic Opportunity Orgaiiization of the Berkeley area flyers were taken home by the children in the two schools spot a nmiouncemnents were made omi radio and articles desci'ihing the program were placed in local newspapers. The Economic Opportunity Organization and the Urban League did the iiiitial screening. The Urban League submitted a list of GO ;tndidates from which the final selection of 45 workei's was imiade by the Berkeley School I )istrh't Personnel Office. TRAINING The teachers, guidance c nsul tants, and principals in the ir gra ii took pa it iii a 344-hour l)reservice training program conducted by staff mnemlers of the University of Califoi'nia. The intent was to seilsitize teachers to the under- lying factors w-hi('h Contribute to 1)001' learning and undesirable behavior in the C1Iissi00111. and to develop functions for teacher-aides anti neighl)orhood w-orkei's in the schools. A Suh)Stailtial part of the lireservice training was based upon the book entitled. (u Ito rul Pa ttero s of Diljfc,cn ha lcd 10(1 ti I lIao eel for Teach ers H) iI(1)f/i)((1l ~5Cl( ools. Insei'vice training was conducted each week for two hours at the end of the school day. This training was under the direction of the University of Cal fornia School of (`riiniiiology. One week the teachers, teacher-aides, and neigh' horhood workers imiet separately : the follow-lug w-eek they had a coml)ined meet- ing. To achieve small, intimate grou~ )s in which view-s and ideas were expressed freely. mieetings ~vei'e hell at each school. The combined miieetings were divided into two sections to a ssui'e this intimacy. The I (tiIPO5~ of these sessions was to get teachers and teacher-aides to speak honestly. to attempt to resolve pi'ob- lems. and to begin to alter their perceptions and behavior. STAFF The staff coosjsted of a project director who was also principal of Columbus School : aml(l administrative assistant : the principal of Lincoln a research (Ii- let-hr who was an instructor at the University of (`aliforiii;i : and process ob- servers ilhi(i grou~ leadei's \\-hI() were gi'mt(lUiIte stu(lemlts at the Iniversity of Calif raPt, amid who conducted the iliselvice trainimig. STRUCTUIiE OF THE PROGRAM To understan(i the structure of the program it liz necessary to bring into forcus the three determining factors of its fi-aniework amid the actual performaiice of its pai'ticipants in time light If those factors. Tie first factor was expresse(1 in PAGENO="0428" 1250 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS these words: "The curriculum of the school and the process of instruction should reflect the physical, emotional, social, and intellectual needs of children as they relate to the promotion of their optimal effectiveness as individuals and as mem- bers of society." The formal objectives of school, i.e., the teacher's approaches, practices, and activities attempted to meet the child's needs. The second determining factor of the program was the decision that the trainees include both parents employed as teacher-aides and neighborhood workers. The teacher-aides worked six hours a day. The teacher and two teacher-aides were seen as a teaching team within each classroom, the teacher being responsible for the training and limitation of instruction, and the aides acting as facilitators. The two aides w-ere to be instructed daily by the teacher in periods of 20 minutes, both before and after school as to what was to be taught. Among the tasks performed by the teacher-aides were helping children who were having difficul~ ties with the assigned work, marking objective tests, duplicating materials, read- ing stories, operating audio-visual materials, and talking with children who have become emotionally upset. The second group of aides were the neighborhood workers. They, too, worked six hours a day, under the supervision of the guidance consultant, working with teachers who had not been assigned teacher-aides and for the school in general. They were to be the liaison between teachers and parents. They established con- tact with parents new to the school: made telephone calls or visited homes to dis- cuss absences or lateness: and made home visits when the teachers could not estab- lish contact with the parents. They were called upon occasionally to take children who became emotionally upset or obsterperous in the classroom to a "cooling off" room, where they continued their classroom work, played with toys, did art work, or engaged in other expressive activities in preparation for the earliest possible return to the classroom. Other activities which they were occasionally called upon to engage in consisted of assisting the nurse with home visits, accompanying classes on field trips, organizing recreational activities during the noon hours, and observing students in the classroom when requested by the guidance consultant or teacher. The third factor determining the structure of the program lay in the conclu- sions and follow-up of the Reading Curriculum Development Project of the Columbus University Laboratory School of September 1966. This project intro- duced a nongraded concept of reading into the schools. It encompassed the selection of a reading series with a new sequence in teaching word attack skills, rewriting the kindergarten through third grade portion of the reading guide; and the separation of word attack skills from comprehension skills. The read- ing program used an intensive phonics approach and reinforcement materials to make possible p~ing of instruction to the child's ability to achieve. Children were grouped part of the time in terms of their ability to decode and at other time to comprehend. The first, second, and third year parts of the program were divided into a number of segments called levels. Four to eight children who were at the same level of learning, and who were of approximately the same age, were brought together to form an instructional group in reading. The grouping of children of a classroom in levels provided an excellent opportunity to use teacher-aides to assume responsibility for groups other than the one in charge of the teacher at any given moment. The question involved presents itself forcefully: To what extent can this responsibility for separate groups be effectively assumed by un- trained teacher-aides? THE PROGRAM IN OPERATION The classrooms: observation All the classrooms observed were large and cheerful and adequate. The content of the activities was centered on the needs and interests of the children. The number of classrooms visited was small, and at least to one observer, in- sufficient for thorough analysis of a complex program. However, the observers were able to determine the place of the teacher-aides through observation and descriptions by teachers and aides in extensive interviews with them. Two first grades. one second, third. fifth and sixth grade classes were visited. The activities in each of the first grades were notable in terms of the criteria for utilization of teacher-aides. At the Columbus School, in the first grade the teacher sat at the front of the room with eight children in a semicircle, working on "s" sentences. She was completely involved with th~ children, answering PAGENO="0429" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1251 each by word or motion, even when several were demanding attention at once. Occasionally she could be heard saying "good", or "very good". The children's attention, in turn, seemed to be altogether centered on her. The room was quiet but the children communicated with each other from time to time. One teacher-aide at the right rear side of the room worked at tables with four children on collages. A second teacher-aide worked with three children at the rear left of the room on learning how to follow directions by coloring outlined figures on a ditto sheet. She was getting each child to print his name, a task which appeared to be difficult for them. She was assisting one child particularly. Apparently this was the slowest group. The eight children with the teacher appeared to be in the most advanced group. The teacher, after approximately five minutes, went to the first teacher-aide and asked if her group w-as ready for reading at the front of the room. The teacher-aide replied, "No, not yet." Without questioning the aide further, the teacher returned to her group of eight to get them started in independent activity related to their `js" sentences. The first teacher-aide finished collages with her children and then moved them to the front of the room, ready for the teacher who was continuing to hell) the group of eight. The second teacher-aide at the rear of the room with three children, collected their coloring, and got out flash cards for other children. Two of her group joined those in a discussion with the teacher at the front of the room. Interaction between teacher and teacher-aides al)pvared t~) he quite subtle they seemed to understand the timing involved in the changing tasks and the need for the movement of the children. The teacher had consulted the first aide and had not irterrupted the aide's group activity, accepting the aide's state- ment that the group was not yet ready for change. One observer left the room at this point, realizing that it all had happened, but with a now-shaken convic- tion that it could not happen under all the circumstances. A first grade at Lincoln School was similar to the first grade at Columbus School with one additional element. The principal of the school was participat- ing as a reading teacher. The classroom teacher was at the front of the room w-ith eight children around a small table conducting a conventional reading session. The principal w-as at the rear of the room at a small table working intensively with two boys, who appeared to have had unusual diffifficulty learn- ing to read. The principal was using a variety of materials, chalk board, ~ards, dittoed material, and a variety of techniques. The principal was extremely attentive to the children, responding to them with eyes, hands, nods of his head. The children responded just as completely. One aide was working with one child on letter sounds. She had the child identify the initial letter of the word the picture she showed him represented, but failed to require him to make the sound of the letter. Another aide in the rear of the room used the paper slicer to prepare small cards of colored paper. The activities changed after about eight minutes, but the groups remained con- stant, the same adult stayed with eaeJi group. There was no apparent inter- action among the adults in the program. The second grade was observed at Lincoln School. The teacher worked inten- sively with two children. One teacher-aide moved around the room helping eight children at their seats working on dittoed materials. The second teacher- aide worked w-ith four children in the rear of the room with flash cards. No interaction between any adults was observed. The fifth grade observation took place at Lincoln School. The teacher was at the blackboard writing math questions for 12 in their seats in the middle of the room. The teacher seemed flustered by the introduction of the observers. The first teacher-aide was working with one child directly in front of the teacher, rather than at a removed, quiet location. The second teacher-aide w-as doing desk work at the rear of the room with a group of four children. No interac~on was observed. The Teachers' evaluation of teach er-a ides In interviews with the teachers and in training sessions including teachers and aides, the range of teachers' opinions about the aides was great. Among the positive statements were: "The need for aides to function at a high level is apparent." Three teachers: "The aides are very helpful." "They are wonderful. They help with the needs of the children." PAGENO="0430" 1252 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS New teachers reported having difficulty in thinking up ways to use aides but teachers with experience in teaching disadvantaged children saw possible uses for other adults in the classroom more quickly. Children now seem to be learn- ing as they had not learned before, these teachers reported. One teacher declared, "I am now much more aware of the language style of these children; I no longer feel the children's style of speaking is hostile." Parents are changing their own sense of worth. Their own skills are devel- oping; through effective utilization of these skills their self-image changes." After working with aides, I have been more alerted to how children feel, what their concerns are. A child came to the first day of school this year in a brand new-. heavy sweater. which was clearly too warm to wear all day in school. The (hild obviously did not wish to remove the sweater. I decided that rather than enforcing the school rule about hanging all outer clothing in the coat room, I would ask the child if she would like to fold the sweater and keep it in her desk, so that nothing would happen to it." She was willing to comply with this re- quest. and spent the day working profitably at her school work, taking only occasional peeks at her new sweater in the desk, instead of worrying about what was happening to it in the coat room." The aides have been extremely revealing. The aides said they wanted their children's language corrected. We have had to interpret to them that teaching does not always imply correction. That there can be constructive feedback and reinforcement of proper language patterns which do not involve overt correction." "The aides have progressed in thinking about discipline, from `We want certain things done to our children' to. three weeks later, `How do you handle this More negative statements from teachers were: `Teachers and aides tend to sit separately in the lunchroom, and during coffee breaks. Teachers don't w-ant to thrust themselves at the aides who may be feel- ing their w-ay in a social situation." `The aides in the upper grades have certain inadequacies. They can't read a simple story. Can't handle fourth grade social studies lesson." `My teacher-aide is seeking intuitively to have the experiences that teachers have about really fundamental things. I think she needs some basic prepa- ration." "There are two aides in my classroom-one is willing and one is more dependent." `We need a `removed' person as an evaluator. This person could take care of the aide coining in late. I didn't say anything when my aide w'as coming in five minutes late. hut now it's getting to be ten or fifteen minutes." "What worries me is the kids: what they're getting out of this experiment." `There are so many experimental programs. How do you know which one works "Aides need more training in how you teach math or reading." "Personality conflicts are a problem. There is more friction between two aides in the classroom than between teacher and aides." The tcacl cr-aides' reaction to the experience The aides in group interviews reported that they like teaching, working with two or three children, listening to the children. They say that the children are not afraid to respond in a small group ; the children enjoy talking about them- selves; that parents often don't really listen to their children; and working with one child stimulates him. They listen to the fantasies of the children aiid try to find ways to motivate them to learn. In their own homes they say their w-ork at school helps them to be more patient with children; they say they feel more tolerant with their own children, and understand better the value of the time spent with them. When the aides were asked how they knew what to do with the children in school, they answered: "I would watch each child in the room and go to the one having difficulty." "Children start talking to you." "School has one ay of teach- ing but all children do not learn that way." I had one child who was having diffi- cultv distinguishing between letters. I had him trace a letter on a large sheet of paper, running his finger over it to get the feel of the letter. Another thing you can do is trace the letter on the child's back to help him feel it." "As a mother von feel the needs of these children." All the aides agreed on the need of children to read. They said they wanted to help them learn. The aides spoke clearly and without hestitation of changes they w~1~ like made in the program: teachers and teacher-aides should have a week of orienta- PAGENO="0431" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1253 tion together; more orientation in content areas is needed, especially reading and spelling and new math, and more in the specific grade areas in which they will work; more than one week of orientation is needed, as well as more psychology, more science; more time should be scheduled with the teacher during the pro- gram; and more time should be provided after school when teachers can show aides what they did in the classroom. They spoke of wanting to help the teacher and of wanting to plan with the teacher. One or two found great delight when a recalcitrant child opened up to them. One discovered a child could not read at all. They wanted more respect from the children and more rules for the children. The reactions of the neighborhood aides Four neighborhood workers in each school worked out of the guidance depart- ment under the supervision of the guidance director and with the hell) of the psychologist. Neighborhood workers were available to all the teachers in the school who did not have two assigned aides in the classroom. The neighborhood workers reported that they got designated parents to come to school to make use of the facilities and services available to them. When one worker got a request to visit a neighbor of her own, she turned it over to another worker. Occasion- ally they persuaded the nurse to make home visits. If it became necessary to make evening calls, neighborhood workers received compensatory time off. The neighborhood workers maintained that most parents, when urged, came to the school, although the guidance counsellor said later that few parents had come. When there was resistance to the neighborhood workers' requests, they said, quite logically, "We feel our way." If a parent asks, they stay outside the house dur- ing the home visits. Usually, however, the worker had called by telephone (if there is one) before going a great distance. If the parent cannot come to school, the neighborhood worker presented a "conference sheet" filled out by the teacher on which the child's progress in the various subjects dealt with in the school periods is described as "excellent," "satisfactory," "working below capacity," or "special learning problem." They said they spent about half the time in the school and half in the com- munity. They went into the homes sometimes where they found persons they knew through some outside connection, such as P.T.A. or Girl Scouts, and found the common membership was a help in establishing friendly relations. There was unanimous avowal that they applied for the job because "We wanted to be needed, not because of the money." Among other motives were: "My children's education is involved ;" "I gave up a key-punching job to work in school because working with people is more important ;" "I love working with children." Other tasks they spoke of included: working in the office with children needing help; getting new parents to come to school; planning for a Saturday movie; organizing a school-community dance for adults. They expressed needs for improvement in program in these terms: more training in the orientation sessions which were "really just for teacher-aides more understanding by teachers of duties of neighborhood workers: more com- munication between aides and teachers, aides and administrators ; scheduled time for aides to talk with teachers. Tasks neighborhood workers occasionally do. which have not been recorded above, cover (heekilig on attendance. tardiiiess and related situations : organizing and assisting w-ith parent discussion groups : setting up a I)laCe for receiving children who need temporary removal from the classroom or class activity: pro- viding an atmosphere which will help to prepare the pupil for the earliest possible return to the classroom; helping pupils who are known to get lost to find their appropriate rooms: accompanying classes on field trips; observing in classrooms to understand school programs: assisting the guidance consl1ltant in other areas as indicated: involvement in organizing Playground activities or recreational activities during noon hour; and observing pupils in classrooms when requested by the guidance consultant or teacher. The inserrice training The inservice training was conducted in each school each week for two hours under the direction of the University of California School of Criminology. it consisted of a modified T-group approach emphasizing effective learning. The content of the T-group sessions constituted the data for the research component of the project. PAGENO="0432" 1254 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS One week the teachers, teacher-aides, and neighborhood workers met separate- ly; the following week they had a combined meeting. To achieve small intiniate groups in which views and ideas could be expressed freelp, meetings were held at each school, and, in addition, the combined meetings were divided into two sections. In one of the training sessions observed, a number of topics were raised and discussed briefly. There were a few moments when no one volunteered to speak and some prodding on the part of the leader resulted. He later told a member of the visiting team that it had been a very slow meeting without much emerging from the group itself. He suggested that the Study Team's interviews had taken a lot out of the teachers and aides an(I caused them to "dry up." At another of the observed training sessions the concern with which the meet- ing began was punishment. The social worker, who did the actual leading, explained to the aides that punishment effects no change. "The children who are mist resentful here had the most beating." A little later she urged that aides should not confront parents with wrong-doings of a child but report it to a teacher. An aide said, "I'm negative to the idea of suspending a child. I'd want to ask, `\Vhat have you done for my child?'" From that point the discus- sion rapi(lly evolved into mass verbal assault by the aides (acting at that point only as parents) on the teachers. At a third training group session the aides (again apparently forgetting they were aides), as parents. (oluplaifle(I that Negro children were discriminated against when they are ready to enter high school. "If a child comes from Columbus and rues to Garfield (tile lii~th school), he is automatically placed on tile lowest track." ~`If the children were taught early they would be fully competent when they reach high school." The teachers responded that they should not he blamed for what had happened years before. The spokesman for t1le aides proclaimed, while the others nodded their heads affirmatively, that their children are as bright as white children, that parents should tell the person who decides the tracks, "Take my child out of the low track because I know he is l)richlt.' A `~ixth grade white male teacher asked if the aides know the statistics, "It is the same problem in other cities." After this discussion the leader attempted to arrive at a topic for the next session. The leaders of the T-aroups were graduate students at the University of California ~nd were prepared for their role as group leaders at a weekly seminar held on tile Fniversity campus, conducted by the project research director. At these seminarS the process involved review of the previous T-group sessions and adoption of strategies for the next session. Preparation for each seminar con- ~i-uted of li4eriing to tapes of the previous T-groups sessions. A group process observer (a more advanced graduate student) said a teacher told her teachers ould not criticize aides nor accept criticism from them. Aides were reported to have said only rood things about each other. Generally the trainers agreed that the teacher should preserve professionalism but be friendly with aides. The trainers noted that aides and teachers tend to sit separately in the lunchroom and at coffee breaks. In some instances, the group agreed, aides were using trainers as a bridge to the administration, and suggested that aides were more sophisticated at attempts to manipulate others, including trainers. At an interview with the staff, it was suggested that trainers may be hearing nerative expressions from aides, because the aides' new closeness to school opened up their feelinrs of inadequacy. The project staff believed that this reaction may have to be lived through before the aides can go on to an intellectual under~tafldiflr of what the school is trying to do. One group seemed to be entering the ~econd stage as it has moved beyond discussion solely on discipline and on to content. At the beginning of training the aides bring with them the narents' concept of authority status. To them the teacher is the authority figure. The staff stated that each culture has its own learning style; these aides ~ reflecting problems of motivation and a sense of powerlessness. One teacher commented in an interview that the first part of the training program sholll(l concentrate on content and the classroom and let the "human relatiofl5 stuff" come later. Opinions about the trainers differed among the teacher5 some teachers feeling they were good leaders, others that they did not supervise the groups effectively. Two of the trainers reported in writing that to date (after six weeks) there `~pneared to he some anxiety in much of the group about what will come out in the meetings and what use might he made of disclosures in the T-group sessions. PAGENO="0433" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1255 The fear focused not only on others in the group but also on the project admin- istration. The two trainers believed that one norm of the group was that it is best not to speak and behave so that discomfort occurs in group situations. They cited instances of an aide becoming more cognizant of her own tendency to project her short-corning; of a person attaining an ability to express herself well: on the other hand, of a teacher with middle class values becoming less acceptinz of the views of others. Observation of the trainers in action with their groups led directly to the conclusion that they were doing very litUe leading in situations in which the group discussions called for freedom within a structured framework. IMPRESSIONS FROM VARIOUS SOURCES AND RECOMMENDATIONS (1) If the program aims to change parent attitudes toward authority in the home, it should involve the community so far as it is at all feasible. A step in this direction was taken as the Economic Opportunity Organization and the Urban League did the initial screening. The community influences the attitude in the homes and will need to be related to the program if the school is to be effective as a change agent. The school cannot do the job alone. That there needs to be great care taken is surely true, but a beginning might be made through the profesional workers in the area, social workers, and trained person- nel in other agencies. (2) Many teachers and aides expressed need for longer preservice training. They raised more than one question. a) Is it possible to lengthen the 30 hours de- voted to training? b) Will a careful examination of the difficulties met in the pro- gram form a basis for a better preservice course that ~vilI give teachers more assurance of ability to use aides, and aides a better notion of what is expected of them than the contents of Cultural Patterns of Differentiated Youth? (3) One of the criteria for selection of teacher-aides and neighborhood workers is that they "must be willing to abide by the rules of the school." It would seem sufficient to impress upon the parent workers that they would he entering an ongoing institutional and professional system during the screening interview without being arbitrary or dogmatic. However, the Study Team made observa- tions after oniy six weeks of program operation, and some progress toward understanding was evident. (4) More time is needed in which teachers and aides can talk together. The 20-minute periods before and after the school session reportedly were usually taken up by other and more pressing problems. (5) Teachers and aides continued to be separated by a considerable social distance after six weeks of the program. A suggestion was made by an aide that one or more brief social gatherings before or during the preservice training might have eased the tension. This was done at one of the two schools. Prob- ably teachers would accept the responsibility of making first advances in such gatherings in another year. (6)The large number and diversity of activities proposed by the planners of the program for the neighborhood workers and discovered by them and the teachers. provided a striking contrast to the relative hesitancy to designate func- tions and activities for the teacher-aides. This suggests alternatives for the future: a) the number of neighborhood workers may be multiplied; or b) teacher-aides may train for a school year as neighborhood w-orkers; or c) a study of the reasons for the ready acceptance of the role of neighborhood workers may indicate suggestions to be applied to teacher-aide relations. (7) A suggestion from a teacher had logic in it: to discuss content in initial training and later human relations. The same sort of idea came out of T-group training and other group process deliberations. A PP.OFILEOF A PROJECT TO TRAIN AUXILIARY SCHOOL PERSox~cEL (TEA('HKR-AIDE5~ IN r0NJUNCTH)N WITH AN NDEA INSTITITE FOR ADVANCF:o STFI)Y vo~ TEACHERS OF DISADVANTAGED CHILDREN (Sponsored by The University of Maine. Orono. Mnine~ Travel folders will tell you that the State of Maine is larger than the other five New England States combined. They will tell you that within tine bord~rs of the State is the largest fresh water lake contained entirely within the United 75-492-07-pt. 2-28 PAGENO="0434" 1256 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMEND~NTS States. Perhaps you will even learn that Maine's largest city, Portland, has a population of 72,000. When you turn to the 1960 Census you find that in that year 22.8 percent of all Maine families had incomes under $3,000. A further breakdown of that figure reveals that 40.5 percent of farm families were under the $3,000 income level. In 1964. the U.S. Office of Education ranked Maine lowest among the states in the percentage of high school graduates going on to higher education, only 31 percent of whom do so. The educational statistics of the State reveal that, in 1960, the median level of schooling for the adult population was 11 years, and that the dropout rate in high school from 1961 to 1965 was 40 percent. The staff of the University of Maine Project to Train Auxiliary School Personnel offered as partial explanation for this revealing statistics, the fact that Maine has an abundance of tiny secondary schools which are unable to provide either a varied çj~~ stimulating curriculum, or even a curriculum which would prepare students to compete on the college level with graduates of better high schools in Maine and elsewhere. Further the staff noted that many teachers living in rural areas, in daily contact with rural poverty, do not, themselves, recognize the extent to which this poverty is a blocking factor in a pupil's ability or willingness to benefit from the learning-teaching process. In recent years both emphasis and urgency have been given to the war on poverty in large cities where privation is immediately visible and threatening to the welfare of the entire society. The University of Maine, in its proposal to sponsor an institute to prepare auxiliary personnel for a role in education, said, "The plight of rural disadvantaged Americans, while less visible, is no less compelling of concern." In 191i5. The University conducted an institute on the needs of rural disad- vantageil youth in Maine and the success of that institute confirmed the staff's initial judgment that "continuing attention is needed to solve the problems of rural education.' The University was able to provide that "continuing attention" in the present project, with funding from the Office of Economic Opportunity, in conjunction with an NDEA Institute for Advanced Study for Teachers of Disadvantaged Youth. The primary objective of the project was to prepare auxiliary personnel to participate in the learning-teaching process in such a way as to make a genuine education contribution while offering the possibility of meaningful employment for welfare recipients. Speaking of other significant goals, the proposal con- tinues. "An exploratory program of this type has goals beyond the training of .`~() teacher-aides to assume already defined roles in the educational hierarchy. The role of the teacher-aide is really in the process of definition." The staff also believed that such a program. if successful. would produce shifts in the teacher's and the auxiliary's self-perception. It was, therefore. proposed to incorporate in the program the study of possible self-perception shifts. This was particularly appropriate since mothers receiving Aid to Dependent Children were to participate as auxiliaries. The stereotyped notion of a person "on welfare" had had an impact on the self-image of these mothers. The project base was an Orono (Maine) public high school which serves as the practicun~ school for the College of Education at the University of Maine. All the activities of the Institute were conducted at this school except for the audio-visual workshop for the auxiliaries. This component was held on the University campus because of the problems involved in transporting eouipment. To assist in planning the program, superintendents and principals whose teachers were attending the NDEA Institute were consulted by the project staff prior to the beginning of the program at the University. The Maine Department of Health and Welfare was invited to help plan selection criteria and recruit- ment procedures because the focus was to he on recruiting recipients of Aid for Dependent Children. The Maine Teachers Association (MTA) was also involved in the planning. and assisted in publicizing and supporting the program. The executive secretary of the MTA. who had one time served as a staff member of the Office of Economic Opportunity. served as a consultant to the program. PROGRAM PARTIC~ANTS Thirty teachers. between the ages of 26 and 58. participated in the program as enrollees in an NDEA Institute for Teachers of Disadvantaged Youth. These teachers were recruited through the Maine Teachers Association and the prin- PAGENO="0435" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1257 cipals of their high schools. one criterion for selectioii was that the teachers come from schools where there was a possibility of employing auxiliaries. Twenty-five mothers were recruited and selected to larticipate as auxiliaries in the program. They ranged in age from 20 to 50. and all except two were receiving Aid for Dependent Children. These applicants were recruited through the efforts of the Maine Department of Health and Welfare. Social workers whose case loads included such women were apprised of the opportunity aiid, in turn, explained the availability of this training to women they believed would benefit from it and might make effective use of it. In soiae cases the social worker helped the client apply to the project: in other cases the applieant took the initiative. The two young women not receiving Aid for Dependent Children were recruited through the principals of their schools. The criteria for selection of auxiliary-(andidates were that tile candidate : 1) be at least 21 years old; 2) be at least a high school graduate or express willing- ness to prepare for the High School Equivalency Examination: 3) be in good mental and physical health; 4) have her youngest child of school age: and 5) have a family income in the poverty range. Eligible candidates were given a battery of tests at Camp MAIN-Stay, including measure of assumed similarity and social distance. These women were further screened by the staff of Camp MAIN-Stay and by the director of this project. (Camp MAIN-Stay is an organ- ization with wide experience in work with disadvantaged children and their families). PROGRAM ST1rncTFRE Following a two-week orientation program at Camp MAIN-Stay, the auxiliaries and their children moved into a fraternity house on the University's campus, where they remained in residence for six weeks. The teachers were housed locally or commuted from their own homes. In the early morning, teacher- and auxiliary-participants attended elass sepa- rately. The instructional program for auxiliaries included typing and prepara- tion for the High School Equivalency Examination. The teacher-participants attended classes in sociology of disadvantaged groups and educational psychology and child development during this time. At 10 :00 A.M. both groups met with the children in the practicum classes. The pupils in the practicum were the children of the auxiliaries. There were five practicum groups, each having, generally, six teacher-participants, five auxil- iaries, and approximately seven children. Usually only one teacher-auxiliary team wroked at a time. while the others were observers. Audio tape and closed circuit television were used for observation and evaluation of these instructional activities. Staff members, teacher-participants, and aides joined in criticizing the learning-teaching activity. Opportunities were provided for participant experimentation with such procedures as: large group instruction, non-graded grouping, small group instruction, grouping by maturity, interest, and ability, one-to-one tutorial instruction, and team teaching. Opportunities were also provided for the investigation of highly directive instructional techniques and unobtrusive "discovery" methods. Each practicum class was s~upervised and organized by a member of the Institute staff. The practicum lasted until 3 :00 P.M. Every day directly following the practicum, the teacher-auxiliary teams met in snmall seminar groups to evaluate the practicum experience as well as other facets of the program. Occasionally these meetings were replaced with seminars on particular problems. There were seven such seminars during the project. From 4 :15 to 5 :00 P.M. the auxiliaries participated in workshops dealing with audio-visual aids or dramatics. The teachers used this time for independent study. Field trips were organized for the children in the practicumn, on which they were accompanied by both the teac'her-participa nts and the auxiliaries, Each practicum group made two video tapes ~vliich were used ill (liseusSjons. primarily for the exploration of the shifts in self-perception which the project staff had proposed as one of the objectives of the program. The design and content of the program was directed toward preparing auxfl- lanes to assist children, individually and in small groups, in remedial work and in independent study, under the supervision of the teacher. The auxiliaries also performed clerical. monitoriaL and custodial functions: operated audio-visual equipment; and prepared materials for class. PAGENO="0436" 1258 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS The flexibility of the program, its sensitivity to the needs and desires of the teacher-participants and the aide-trainees, and its capacity to change structure and focus were notably enhanced by the presence of three process observers. These staff members were asked to observe with sphinx-like detachment afl activities in the program from its very heart-the practicum-to activities of peripheral interest in which teacher or aide might be involved. The process observers were asked to "feed back" to the staff, no less than weekly, the fruits of this labor. Staff meetings inevitably extended beyond their scheduled limit because of the interest generated by observer reports. IMPRESSIONS OF THE PROGRAM FROM VARIOUS SOURCES "This program." said one member of the Visitation Team, "reflected the careful planning which went into it." The purposes of the Institute were clearly stated in the proposal: to enhance the quality of education through the use of auxiliary personnel. to offer the po~'sibi1ity of meaningful employment for the indigenous poor through a program of instructional experience, and to work toward both role definition in the educational process and improved self-perception of the individuals involved in the program. Each purpose was treated separately in program planning to maximize the possible benefits accruing to all concerned- the individual participants and all involved in the learning-teaching process. The resulting design then incorporated the goals and the pertinent techniques and strategies into a single program. Although the selection of mothers receiving Aid for Dependent Children seemed to fit admirably in the overall objective of the program, it evoked immediate resistance from the teachers: "These are not the kind of people you want in a classroom." Many teachers later admitted that this initial reaction could be attributed to stereotyped notions about people on welfare. It became clear that one of the purposes of the program would thus have to be to change the teachers' impressions of these specific persons and through this new perception to chal- lenge stereotypes about welfare recipients. Most of the auxiliaries lacked a high school education and many had experi- enced family disorganization with attendant personal and economic problems. One staff member said, `The auxiliaries came on the defensive, not knowing what to expect." Close contact with these mothers, through the program. revealed that most of them were looking for a new direction, a change in their lives. The director of the program observed that the auxiliary's image of herself "began to change just by virtue of leaving the home situation." Re added, "She was no longer just another ADC mother: she was a woman getting dressed up and going to work. That made a terrific difference." The desire to change was further established when eight out of 12 who took the high school equivalency test, passed the examination at the end of the summer. The teacher-participants who had helped by tutoring in the evening shared the auxiliaries' pride in their achievement. A one-hour typing class each morning may have had little direct bearing on assistance in a classroom. hut the development of such skills ("cosmetic skills," the director called them) did much to alter image and relationship. It was an occasion for jubilant celebration when one auxiliary passed her 70-words-per- minute test in typing. (Most of the others were able to type over 20-words-per- minute by the end of the proiect). commenting on the acquisition of such competence, a staff member said, "If the auxiliary has no skills, if she walks into a classroom and is told to sit over there and wait for an errand. she is defeated. If she has skills, she can cope with the situation in which she finds herself." The background of the mothers was oecasi~nally richer in some aspects of living than that of the teachers with whom they worked. One auxiliary, for instance, who had come from a military family, had travelled extensively and lived abroad-for several years in Turkey. Shortly after the program began. the visiting team was able to perceive the high esteem in which the teacher-participants held the auxiliaries. Such accept- ance by the teachers was a source of obvious gratification, even elation, to the auxiliaries. While one purpose of the program was to offer opportunity for new careers for the disadvantaged, it also worked to the advantage of the schools. In the staff's opinion, the program revealed definite benefits in several areas. The auxiliaries PAGENO="0437" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1259 not only acted as a bridge between school and the low-income children, but were able to get to understand the children and know theni in a new way through helping with their speech and reading problems. The proportion of teachers and auxiliaries to children in the practicum was designed to give each participant an opportunity to work closely with one child at a time. Although the teacher-participants were at first bewildered by such an "unreal" situation, the project staff defended it on the basis that it gave the teacher an opportunity to concentrate on teaching rather than using time and en- ergy on problems of control. The project director made the observation that "teachers tend to fly to administrative problems. They often become involved with the `how' of handling a situation rather than in teaching." This situation provided an opportunity to innovate, to see what could be done, given ideal cir- cumstances, then to adapt and transfer as much of the new approach as possible to the regular classroom. `Anyway," he added, "standing in front of 70 kids and lecturing on the history of Maine can scarcely be called a `reaF situation." The program was designed to use the interaction between teachers and aides in the classroom as a departure point for discussion and counseling. The three staff observers noted that sufficient time was scheduled to permit full develop- ment of these processes. They also found that the effectiveness of an auxiliary's participation in such team or group discussions was generally reflected in her effectiveness in the classroom. The auxiliary who participated actively and freely in these discussions, was just as positive in her role in the classroom. The project staff also believed that the value of the three staff observers In this program indicated the need for a full-time observer in the school at all times. The teacher-participants of the NDEA Institute which was associated with this I)roiect met together iiear the close of the program to evaluate their experiences. They made a number of recommendations for changes which they would like to see in future programs of this nature. Orientation, both for teacher and aide participants should be longer, and both the objectives and process of the program 5110111(1 be interpreted to all the participants. Communication during the pro- gram. between participants and staff, c'ould be facilitated by having a member of each practicuni group attend staff planning meetings. Teachers expressed the need for the practicumn to he scheduled for more than three weeks. Teachers also believed that time should be scheduled so aides will have fewer conflicts between instruction (such as A-V classes) and planning time with teachers related to the pro cticum. Teachers also believed that the selection criteria for teacher-participants might he changed. Their feeling was that teachers who choose to attend an NDEA Institute tend to be those who desire self-improvement. They believed that "other teachers needed the experience more." The staff reported that the training would be assured of more impact once teachers and aides were working in their schools if they could have been selected in teams of one teacher and one aide who would train together and then return to the same classroom to work together during the school year. Evaluation of the overall program by the project staff revealed the advantages of embedding an integrated auxiliary and teacher training program in the con- text of a real, though admittedly innovative, instructional program for rural disadvantaged children. The quality and quantity of interaction among staff- teacher-aide-child, all channeled towards improving the learning situation for children, resulted in a successful learning experience for staff. teacher, and aide as well. Certainly questions remain unanswered but a few have been clearly and conclusively answered: insofar as this demonstration is concerned. "There is no reason to disqualify a person as a potential auxiliary in the classroom solely on the basis of her status as an A.D.C. mother. A highly intensive program of relatively short duration can begin to change the stereotyped thinking and atti- tudes that teachers have of poverty families and of A.D.C. mothers in particular. Stereotypes that children and mothers from disadvantaged backgrounds have developed of teachers and school can be brought into question when opportunity is provided for communication in a natural, mutual effort to improve the learn- ing situation for children. A whole host of attitudes that teachers have de- veloped concerning children. subject matter. and learning that tend to make the classroom rigid, cold an(1 inhospitable can he affected by the introduction of aides." The Director believed that in the Maine program such changes did and there- fore can occur. Whether positive results can or w-ifl he duplicated in less for- PAGENO="0438" 1260 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS tuitous circumstances remains to be seen, but the fact that some shift in atti- tudes and self-perception appears to be possible under laboratory conditions encourages further effort to achieve these outcomes. PROFILE OF ORIENTATION-TRAINING PROGRAM FOR TEACHERS AND TEACHER AIDES WORKING IN THE 1966 SUMMER HEAD START PROJECT (Sponsored by Office of Economic Opportunity Training and Development Cen- ter, California State Colleges: San Fernando Valley, Los Angeles, Long Beach Calif.) INTRODUCTION The O.E.O. Training and Development Center is a tn-college training facility representing San Fernando Valley State College, California State College at Long Beach, and California State College at Los Angeles. In September, 1965, the Center was funded by a direct grant from the Office of Economic Opportunity, Washington, D.C., to provide for the training of personnel, both professional and paraprofessional, to work in poverty areas. Since its inception, the Center has trained 3.000 adults to work in poverty areas of Southern California. Two-thirds of this population were paraprofessionals. The values which guided the Center's work were two-fold: (1) Highest professional competence possible must be employed to train personnel to make the poverty program as effective as possible. (2) There must be a commitment to the maximum feasible participation of community people. The Center has stressed co-planning with trainees and has had a profound trust and faith in their latent skills and abilities. Training paraprofessionals for Head Start project Neighborhood residents. especially mothers of pre-school children, can become excellent teacher-assistants if they are carefully selected. Assistant teachers should have all of the human qualities that a teacher has, plus a w-illingness to learn and expand their horizons. They work dir~tly with the young children and must have strengths to bring to these children. Using neighborhood residents, especially mothers, pays off in two ways. By working with children under the direction of a skilled teacher, these teacher-assistants become more skilled with their own children and more knowledgeable about wa,vs of enriching the life of their own children. There is not a better course in child development than working directly with children under good guidance. But neighborhood residents will also bring many assets to their job-they will be giving as well as getting. They may have a special feeling for the qualities and strengths and needs of the young children of the poor. They may be skilled in talking to the parents of these childi'en. interpreting to them the value of the experience the children are having. . . . Teacher-assistants should be chosen both for how they can contribute to them (Head Start children) and to their ow-n children.1 This rationale for using neighborhood residents, developed by Project Head Start, describes the strengths which neighborhood residents, particularly mothers of young children, can bring to the child development program. The O.E.O. Training and Development (`enter conducted a series of programs designed to train Los Angeles County neighborhood residents as teacher-assistants so that they would be able to use their inherent strengths and learn new skills for the benefit of the local Head Start programs. The purposes of the project were to provide adequate entry level preservice preparation for teacher aides so that they could begin functioning in 1~al Head Start programs and, to a lesser extent, to develop local community leadership. Broad goals included To help aides obtain new- insights into school-community relations: To help aides improve their skills in perception and in communication: To hell) aides develop an understanding of the ethics of the teaching profession, especially as they relate to the role of aides: Prnieet Henil St)rt. c-fl)~111~ltV .~.tion Pi'c~r~rrn. ()fficr' ~f Economic Opportunity. The ~toff for o (`hl'l J)ee1opmeo~ (`~trr. Bok~ot 1 WaThington. D.C. PAGENO="0439" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTTCATIOX AMENDMENTS 1261 To broaden concepts of child development aiid the learning process; To acquaint aides with the pre-school curriculum and their role within it To define the duties which the aides will undertake and to help them acquire the requisite skills. The modification of self-concepts was given special emphasis because the O.E.O. Center realizes the importance of positive self-concepts in auxiliaries. A pro- gram that is academically sound and helps the auxiliaries learn specific skills will be a failure unless it also affects the self-concepts, attitudes, and feelings of the participants so that their behavior will I)e modified. Conference with Bank ~trcet College On June 3 and 4, 1966. representatives from the O.E.O. Center and 14 other federally funded projects were called to New York City by the Director of the Study of Auxiliary Personnel in Education, conducted by Bank Street College of Education. The purpose of the conference was to design and plan a study for evaluating the roles and functions of auxiliary personnel particil)ating in educational programs. At the time of this conference, the O.E.O. Center was planning an orientation-training program for 120 teachers and teacher aides for the 1966 summer Head Start project. This population of 120 trainees represented a small percentage of the ongoing programs, but since the cooperative evaluation required pre-testing and post- testing, this relatively small group was the only one on which data could he collected. SPONSORSHIP The Economic and Youth Opportunity Agency (E.Y.O.A.~ of Los Angeles County subcontracted to the O.E.O. Training and Development Center the train- ing of the professional and paraprofessional personnel for the 1966 summer Head Start program. One-week of orientation, to be followed by inservice training, was requested by E.Y.O.A. Concern was expressed by the O.E.O. Center over the effectiveness of a one-week prOgi'alu because previous programs for Head Start held by the Center were two-week sessions: however, the funding agency had rio alternative because of the limitations of time and budget. With such a time linilt (30 hoursi, choices had to be made as to prime objec- tives for the training session and careful planning had to be made for the inservice programs. PTJRPOSE The purpose of the June 20 to 24 Orientation-Training program was to pre- pare the 120 teachers and teacher aides to w-ork coopei'atively with each other and with all auxiliary personnel in the }Tead Start Child Development Centers. The program was designed to familiarize the teacher and teacher aides with the objectives and expectations of the Head Start program: to acquaint the par- ticipants with the resources. agencies. and services of the community involved in the Head Start program : to provide a study of the growth, development and special problems which participants might encounter in their work with Head Start children, and to initiate the learning of requisite skills needed in working with four-year-olds. The objectives of the program are to help each participant to: Develop an understanding of the rationale of Head Start and its imple- mentation in the Child Development Centers: Gain some insights relative to the Head Start Child-his growth and development, how he learns, his special needs and problems; Develop a positive self-concept and help him to gain an understanding of the relationship of a positive self-concept to learning in the Head Start Child: Develop the overall curriculum and plan specific programs for Head Start children; Learn how volunteers may he used to implement the program in the child Development Centers and in the community: Develop some initial skills and competencies in workin~ with varied media appropriate for the four-year-old with special emphasis on the art media: Become aware of the importance of workin~ as a team in the Child Devel- opment Center to guide the development of the Uend Start Child. PAGENO="0440" 1262 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS IMPLEMENTATION To achieve the objectives of the program, participants in preservice training were involved in the following activities: Listening to speakers who developed the topics of the day (see programs), followed by questions from the trainees: Discussing the implications of the topics of the speakers (in small groups) Visiting selected Head Start Child Development Centers, followed by guided discussions: Viewing films appropriate to topic under discussion; Role-playing potential problem situations which might arise among staff members and discussing possible solutions; Participating in clinics and workshops such as developing a day's program, effective use of space, both indoor and outdoor, and selection of appropriate instructional materials; Viewing exhibits of children's art work from Child Development Centers, working with science materials and equipment, browsing through books; Working with a variety of art media; Observing the children's reactions to and involvement in a puppet show; Learning songs appropriate for Head Start children; Discussing informally the problems raised by speakers or participants. METHODS OF RECRUITMENT AND SELEcTION Recruitment u-as carried on by the neighborhood delegate agencies. When participants were asked how they heard of the program the responses varied: "My daughter was in school and she came home and told me about it;" "I helped the teacher where my son was in school and she told me about it :" "Through our pastor." Several replied, "Through the Community Action Agency." The following criteria to be followed by the delegate agencies for the final selections were established by E.Y.O.A.: Head Start teachers "The prospective Head Start teacher must meet one of the following sets of requirements: A college degree in early childhood education with 12 units in early child- hood education or in child development; No teaching experience required. or A college degree, with 12 units in early childhood education or in child development which must he completed by 196S; and 2 years experience work- ing with young children ages 2-S years. outside one's own family. or Two years college completed in general education, with 12 units in early childhood education or in child development which must be completed by I9fiS, and 3 years experience working with young children ages 2-8 years, outside one's own family." Head Start Iea('JEer,s aides "The requirements for the prospective Head Start teacher-aides are: (1) high school graduate: (2) 2 years experience working w-ith young children age 2-8 years, out- side one's own family: (3) froni a family of four or less with an income up to $4,000, with $500 allowed for each additional family member." Because of communication problems between E.Y.O.A. and the delegate agencies, the O.E.O. Training and Development Center had no contact with or knowledge of auxiliaries whom they were to train until the participants arrived on the first morning of the program. PARTICIPANTS The orientation-training program was concerned with two groups of partici- pants: the aides and the teachers. The aides were indigenous people who lived in the poverty areas where their Head Start Centers were located. One third of them were Negroes. Of the remaining two thirds, half were Mexican-Americans. The other half were PAGENO="0441" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1263 Anglos. They ranged in age from 18 to 51 years. Of the 43 aides who partici- pated in the program five were men. A majority of the aides had a high school education plus one year of college, and had worked one year in a nursery school. The 89 teacher-participants included 81 women and eight men who ranged in age from 21 to 62. The majority of teachers had five years of I)ublic school teaching in kindergarten through primary grades, but less than a year of nursery school teaching experience. Nine teachers had master's degrees: 28 had done some post-graduate work: 41 had bachelor's degrees, six had completed three years of college, and the remaining had two years college. PRE-PLAN N1NG The program was designed and developed by a Planning Committee comprised of members of the O.E.O. Training and Development Center staff which included five training consultants who were nursery school specialists and had been working all year in the Head Start program: three training counselors who were professors from the California State Colleges: the Head Start l'roject i)irector; and the Assistant Training Coordinator and the Training Coordinator of the Center, who served as chairman of the Planning Committee. The Committee had recommendations for the training from the teachers, assistants and aides who had received their training from the O.E.O. Center and were now working in Head Start Child I)evelopmeiit Centers. The (onhlnittee worked to include these recommendations into the structure of the program. PROGRAM STRUCTURE The program had two parts: a June orientation, and an inservice training pro- gram for the 120 professional teachers and paraprofessional aides working in Head Start centers extending from June 27 to August 26. Twenty-two training consultants from the O.E.O. Training and Development Center assumed the responsibility for the inservice training. This training included presentations and demonstrations in the use of instruc- tional materials: workshops in the areas of music, art, science; orientation proce- dures for Neighborhood Youth Corps participants and neighborhood volunteers. The consultants also helped in developing programs for parent education and in organizing community action programs for support of Head Start projects. SETTING The training was conducted at two different sites to accommodate the geo- graphical locations of the trainees. One was located in an elementary school in Compton, California and the other in a church in the South-Central Los Angeles area. Each facility had adequate rooms to accommodate small-group discussions and workshops and a large area for the entire group to participate in the general sessions. Number of trainees at each training site Location 1: Phillips Temple CME Church. Education Building, 971 East 43rd Street, Los Angeles, California. Number of Trainees: 44 teachers. 29 assistant-teachers. Location 2: George Washington Elementary School. Compton, California. Number of Trainees: 45 teachers. 14 assistant-teachers. STAFF The training sessions were conducted by staff members of the O.E.O. Training and Development Center who were nursery school specialists and teachers In the field of Early Childhood Education. Personnel serving as consulting special- ists and speakers included college and university professors, representatives from community agencies and organizations. and public school personnel. IMPRESSIONS OF THE PROGRAM FROM VARIOUS POINTS OF VIEW A significant feature of this program was the emphasis upon the team approach to the teaching of Head Start children. In previous training programs, teachers and teacher aides had been trained in separate groups. As a result of this separa- tion, when the two came together in the classroom, there were many instances PAGENO="0442" 1264 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS of conflict in philosophy and teaching procedure. The sharing of mutual experi- ences ten(Ied to build coiiuiion bonds and common goals for the welfare and happi- ness of the four-year-olds in the Head Start program. The team approach also gave the teacher and the aide an opportunity to know one another and to gain respect for the unique talents and abilities that each had to offer. The full utiliztion of these talents and abilities makes for a richer Head Start program. Pairing the professional and paraprofessional teachers in Head Start train- ing programs appeared to give the paraprofessional a feeling of prestige. Grad- ually the old concept of the teacher as the professional and aide as the unlerling began to fade. Both were needed to serve the children well. The paraprofessional's most significant contribution, however, was the rapport with the understanding of the community and the problems children face while growing up in poverty areas. One subjective measurement of the effectiveness of the training programs is the personal reactions of the participants. This form of evaluation cannot take the place of scientific evaluation, but it does indicate to what extent personal needs have been met and the feelings of the participants toward the program. Time did not permit written evaluations of the one-week training program, but included in the report are selected responses from personnel participating in earlier Head Start training programs. The following comments are direct quotations from teacher aides: "Where else but in America. could we sit in one room, under one roof. We came from many sections of our great Los Angeles and Los Angeles County. We came with many hurts, yet we set and listen. Also when we were not pleased we had the liberty of talking against it. We sat next to each other, we laughed, we talked, we became angry, we cried, but together for two weeks and under one roof, in one room. Only in America." "Because of Head Start picking such specialized persons to teach and to instruct us and also getting qualified speakers that understand poverty to speak to us. I have my heart in it that this Head Start program is going to be very successful." `When I was told I could paint as many pictures as I wanted, I felt free and happy. I w-as so used to people telling me when and how to do things that I was overjoyed. Imagine how the children will react." `This has been to ate a constant reminder that the welfare of all children will forever he important anti this Head Start) is a way of showing the children as ~vell as their pai'ents and the community that some one cares- there is still hope." "Iletid Start is the beginning to a long road bac'k to a beautiful dream of what we means when we say American Democracy. So many things have happened to bring shame. heartaches and tears to some of us, and left some without plans for mm future. IIeaO. Start is the long arias of fulfillment, not only for poverty families, hut all Americans everywhere. I have enjoyed every hour in this program and have already applied my learning in my own family. .~nd I can say thanks to Head Start for enriching my knowl- edge to live, love and enJoy tIme life ~~`e have in the good old U.S.A.'' "The head Start training program has helped inc to have better under- stanc1ing of the problems that will arise in the development and molding of lives of the children that will he under our care, I greatly appreciate the efforts of out' consultant Training Teachers, who provided outstanding speakers. films, songs. and also the `buzz' discussions in which we were all aimle to participate." "This training program I feel was most successful, because it made me open my eyes to see the great need there is in helping poverty stricken chil- dren and their faumilies to guilt their self-confidence, respect and dignity." The following comnnients are direct quotations from teachers "The training program should always remain a requirement for Head Starr. Both time theory and the practical side were most beneficial to me." "1 feel that a (e~ mnprehensive program such as we have been given during the last two weeks, increased our knowledge of children's needs, and gave us better niethocis to help in guiding them to the fulfillment of these needs. Thank you for a most inspirational session," PAGENO="0443" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1265 "This proglain I think is best said to be necessary and enriching. Thank you for the opportunity to join in building not kids for the world but the world for their kids." "I cannot find words strong enough to express the impact of this confer- ence and training upon me. Though I have lived in poverty. I have worked in poverty, but never have I been so educated to the task before aiid means to handle this task as I have in these two weeks. I am sincerely grateful to all the trainers, sponsors and all concerned with this program. Thank you kindly.' "I feel that taking this training was very valuable to Inc. I do feel that I ani better qualified to approach the problems that ~vill confront inc. This training has enlightened me to feel secure in the task that 1 am going to do.'' "This whole project was very well planned and organized. There was a wealth of iiiforni~ition. enthusiasm an(1 good-will evidence(1 by all in charge which was tlieii reflected anioiig the group of trainees. It was very inspiring at all times and I hope we can take back to the Head Start Center most, if not all of the hell) we received." "A sense iif well being now exists within nie as a direct result of this training l)rOgr~~11. I feel confident now and anxious to begin as a Head Start teacher. rrhe content of the program was ~vell planned and used excellent resource people. I enjoyed every minute of the iiieeting. Thank you." ~ is remarkable how nimh learililig I did during the short perioi. Along with the learning. I have been motivated into doing all I caii to make Head Start a worthwhile prograni in Child Development." The training I have received has been of great iniportaiiie to inc. I feel I am indeed a better liuiiiaii l)eing fii ha vilig ~t. It has improved my skills as a teacher and mother. Thank you." When I caine to this class for training. I had many questions about the setting up of the school amid our relationship with the parents. Now since it has ended my questions were answered. I feel very secure iii the job I am 1 iok~iig forward to starting.'' "This was just great! ! I'm leaving with a feeling of self-confidence I badly needed. You've increased our semise if iulissioll. This program denionstrated the values in the use of indigenous peol)le as aux- iliary pei'somumiel in disadvantaged schools in a particularly dramuuatic manner, aceordimig to the visitation team. One team iuuenuber m'eliorted that his observa- tit in of the tea cher-a ssi sta nts in action iii the Flea d Sta it pr igra Ills I after having received training at the Center) iuiade luimim much moore optimistic ahioiit what ``the people fromuu the ionumuuunity have to offer edueatii mitt 11 y in their schools-to their clii lii rca and to the I in fessi ( )na I staff. lIe suggesteil that they 1 irilig a fresh and different way of viewing children and educational problems. Such auxiliai'ies raise questions which help teachers afl(l a'liiuimuistra tots to understand better the conuiuuunity amid the ihildreii. These a ides help to establish initial mfta~ with children I e.g.. a Mexican-Aiuierictiii teacher-assistant can reach the non-English- speaking Mexican-Aiuuem'icaii preschooler in a way that a non-Spanish-speaking cannot 1 . They help to explain education and schools to pareilts and others in the (iiIluifliTiIity who fear or resent education and schools. They provide positive nuoilels for children of effective, skillful peolile doing iinpcirtant work. Iii support of this ohiservatiomi. a tea(her-assistant declal'e(l iii a group inter- view. `This pro~ranl has helped me learn. I've become aware of the real situa- tion in the classroom. But I have been able to help as well as to learn. I've helped get pai'ents interested in education and involved in the school. I know the parents and I know how they feel and how they think letter than. perhaps, the teacher (hoes. This is my main aieomplishmuuent in this part icul;ir school." The close relationship of the teacher-assistant to the conuiimunity \vas sti'esse(l throughout the program. The potential of the auxiliary as a link hie~ ~veeii school and community was capitalized on by home visits the teacluem-assiet;lnts made once they were on the job. Many auxiliaries reported tot only imuiprovemnents in parent's understanding of the job the sihool was trying tui do with their lire- schooler, lint also in the auxiliary's own ~elf-hmnti ge of Iuei'sel f as a hii'oductive helpful person. Aim example of this dual result is an anecdote inc teacher- assistant related to the visiting team. 1 went omi inc lime visit with the teach- er which was very helpful. We visited one man whiise wife was dead, and he had five children. The home-it u-as in such a terrible state flint I just went PAGENO="0444" 1266 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS ba(k to my house anti got some pans, pails and came back and cleaned the whole house and straightened it up. And when he came home that night he was very happy. This was entirely on my own, but because I was a member of the com- munity I felt I should do it. But although he realized that I didn't do it as part of my job, he did realize that I worked in a school and I think this helped. I think he feels much different about school than he did before. He sees the school as wanting to help him and accepting him." A PROJECT To TR~ux MIGRANTS FOR NONPROFESSIONAL JOBS (TEACHER-AIDS) (Sponsored by University of South Florida Center for Continuing Education, Bay Campus, St. Petersburg, Florida) A long auto ri(le out of St. Petersburg through delightful scenes of sub-tropical trees and flowers, and along waters that stretch out into the far distance, leads to the camps of the migrant workers. The "better ones" consist of miniature houses, perhaps a line of them paralleling the remote country road, the worst of delapidated wooden shacks in ramshackle order in which an entire family may occupy only one room. In these, for a season of picking fruit or digging potatoes, live the families of one of the most exploited groups of workers in America, From the ranks of adults who have experienced the wretched, half starved life of the migrant, the participants of the Migrant Teacher Aide Train- ing Program were recruited. Excerpts from their own descriptions of their experiences describe a few of the tragic facets of the family and group life: "We had to go a mile for water." "In Belle Glade today there are people traveling to and from places, some going up there broke and coming hack broke." "There are children that need clothing and shoes in order for them to go to school." "Some live in houses that aren't fit for a rat." "Most of them are afraid to protest because they might wake up in the morning and find out that they are out of a job." "We have Seen the plight of the young children, the giving up of the teenager, the acceptance of the grown-up, and the (leSpair of the old people." The migrant lives in an out group: his culture is not that of the community into which he conies for' a l)rief season, be he Puerto Rican or Mexican, Negro or white. As a consequence there is little communication between his group and those living settled lives in decency and comfort near him. The little schooling migrant children get is begrudged because the migrants are not tax payers, and because of that fact, occasionally are refused any schooling at all. Many migrants would like to break out of the migrant life style. However the cycle of constant travel, little opportunity for education to learn skills, low wages, constant indebtedness to their employers, and debilitation brought about by poor nutrition and inadequate sanitation tends to make escape im- possible. Furthermore, membership in an out group builds strong ties among migrants representing the only security many of them have. Some migrants cite the possible loss of these relationships as a factor which tends to keep them in the migrant community. In spite of the numerous factors binding migrants to an essentially unsatis- factory way of life, many migrants express the desire to develop skills which would permit them to break the cycle. The need, therefore, for a training program seemed obvious to prepare some of them to perform successfully in nonagricultural and meaningful work-especially fruitful would be training for roles, particularly in the schools and agencies serving migrants in health, welfare and educational fields. At a meeting at the University of South Florida in February, 1966, in which representatives of the following am~eni'ies participated: The Florida State Board of Health, tire Migrant Health Coordinator. Marymount College, Community Service Foundation, University of Miami, Florida State Depai'tment of Educa- tion, and the State Department of Public Welfare, the availability of positions for migrants with the training the University of South Florida had in mind was clearly indicated. As a result there was first an obvious need for a program of training which WOul(l help migrants to cope with the problems of a cultural, personal, social, economic, and educational nature that exclude migrants from anything but agricultural employment. Second. the availability of jobs seemed assured after training had been given. Third. the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 offered the likelihood of the necessary funds being available. Fourth, PAGENO="0445" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1267 knowledge was at hand that throughout the countr experiments were going on to test methods of relating nonprofessional aides to teachers in classrooms adding a factor of assurance to undertaking a project of considerable dimensions. OBJECTIVES It is one thing to plan a teacher aide program; it is something else to think through the question of the use of Iliigrants in such a program. In the reports of the programs under the direction of the New Jersey State 1)epartinent of Education, the Wayne State University Project, and others, evidence came to light that adult migrants can achieve the necessary level of competence in such positions, if appropriate instruction and environnien tal experience are provided. In broad terms the general objectives a(lopte(l looked to the designing, implement- ing, and evaluation of planned task-oriented experiences through which qualified niigrants might gain the specific knowledge and coinpetencies which are essential to effective work as nonprofessionals in programs for migrants and their children, The program to achieve these objectives included: (1) Giving all trainees a core of experiences desigiied to enhance their skills in speech, writing, reading, and basic mathematics; orienting them to basic expectations of employers: and helping them to understand those aspects of the general culture which impinge upon theii' immediate situation; (2) Helping each trainee gain selected skills fundamental to the specific job for which he is training; (3) Stimulating and aiding the trained migrants and seasonally employed farm workers in extricating themselves from unskilled seasonal agricultural work: (4) Enhancing the personal and social development of the migrants; (5) Acquainting appi'opriate agencies with the availability of the trainees at the completion of the training program; (6) Acquainting trainees with the services available to migrants and their children. and helping them to understand how to secure such services. COMPOSITION OF PARTICIPANT GROIJP It was planned to include 30 trainees in the program, and that number was enlisted. They were all females, and all but two were Negroes; the two were Mexican. All fell within the age range of 16 to 45 years, clustered around a median of 21 years. They constituted, therefore, a young adult group. Fifteen were single; fourteen married, and one a widow. The married individuals had children ranging up to eight in number. For a migrant group, the educational level was high. Twenty-five of the 30 had had schooling experience for 12 years or more. Four had been in school for 9, 10, or 11 years, and one for less than eight years. Twenty had maintained an average achievement record of C. nine a record of B, and one an average of A. Twenty-five had done field work at some time in their lives and the other five came from migrant families. The trainees varied considerably in their sub- sequent work experience, the greatest number having done clerical work, some of them in school situations: five served as nurses' aides. Four had no work experience. Five had done farm work only. METHOD OF SELECTION AND RECRFITMENT OF TRAINEES The process of selection was superivsed by the Florida State Department of Education. The County Superintendent sent the request for candidates to all princip~ils who relayed the request to teachers. They interviewed prospects who were screened by the State Department of Education. The (hirector of the pioject felt that this process of selection resulted in a group of trainees who were more like teachers, especially in regard to their value systems, than they were like people in the migrant community. In another year the Process will he changed. Throu~h community action programs. candidates for training ~vih1 he found- candidates with potential for the tasks of aides~-and thereby the Project will get deeper into the migrant problem. The educational achievement of (`an(l~dates will be less but through such trainees there will be greater opportunity to have an impact upon the problems of migrants. The staff reported that it re- garded this matter as one of the two major weakenesses of the program. PAGENO="0446" 1268 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS THE STAFF The staff included the administrative director, (the Director of Continuing Education for the University) project director; one principal instructor; a pro- fessional counselor and instructor in child growth and development; a job de- veloper: a research associate; and four other instructors, respectively of ~ffice machines, audio visual aids, health, and reading, speech, and grammar; as well as a secretary and another clerical worker. Originally an additional officer was included in the plans, an administrative assistant-coordinator as a part-time finance officer. The principal instructor for the program who lived in the dormitory with the trainees, serving as dean of students, had a substantial back- ground in work with migrants. Such intimate knowledge was a major asset to the program. STRUCTURE OF THE PROGRAM The program was in progress from September 18, to October 29, 1966. The overall plan by weeks is as follows: The first week was devoted to orientation to work as a nonprofessional: review of speech, writing, reading and basic arith- metic: contemporary affairs information regarding matters of concern to trainees; counseling; and occupational skills. The second week was devoted to interviews and observations to acquaint trainees with program and services of community agencies: to review of speech. writing, reading, and basic mathemat- ics; occupational skills; counseling; and job orientation. The third week was devoted to review of speech. writing, reading, and basic mathematics; and occupa- tional skills. The fourth and fifth weeks-guided field experience (practicum) were devoted to job orientation, basic education, occupational skills. The sixth week was devoted to contemporary affairs; speech, writing, reading and basic mathematics; occupational skills; counseling; and community services. Prep- aration for w-ork in their respective counties was an important feature of the final week with specific job requirements and orientation for each school system. Returns from the Study instrument (checklist of activities) filled out by poten- tial employers was helpf iii in accessing and creating job opportunities. The University of South Florida Bay Campus furnished an adequate setting for the afternoon unit sessions, the meals, and the dormitory which housed the trainees. In the dormitory a set of sensible rules was developed by the trainees and principal instructor. Recreation and entertainment were arranged by the trainees despite the long class hours which were from 8 :00 a.m. to 5 :00 p.m. with the occasional addition of an evening class. Consierable group spirit was evident among the trainees who organized a choral group and a final banquet for the staff, the practicum teachers and principals. The trainees, as a group, made an impact on the campus as a whole. Other University students would stop in at the trainees' dormitory to listen to their singing and to chat. The cohesiveness of the group was further demonstrated by their forming an alumnae group, the Certified Teacher Aide Association, which plans to distribute a newsletter to members and to hold a reunion to which they plan to invite the teachers in the schools in which they work. During the program trainees were provided with $3.50 per week for personal expenses on campus. Each trainee was given $20.00 per week to send home, as well as reinihursement for travel expenses. Practicums were held in the three weeks prior to the last week of the program. They took place in three Catholic parochial schools and covered kindergarten through 5th grade. The parochial schools were selected as the practidurn setting because the University was not able to secure the use of the St. Petersburg public schools as a practicum for migrant aides. Because of over-commitment and other factors it was impossible to arrange for the practicum to be held in the local public schools. The resulting arrangement with the parochial schools, it was reported. worked out to the satisfaction of the parochial school administrators and teachers. the University. and the trainees, although it did not provide the same milieu as that in which aides would work later. In the three schools the rooms were adequate in size and pleasant appearing. The aides were provided with their own work tables. Equipment noted included overhead projectors. opaque projectors. and flannel hoards. Of 16 classes observed. in only one was an aide absent (because of illness). Aides were correcting papers or putting marks in record books in six rooms: children were going to the aide for assistance in two; aides were moving around PAGENO="0447" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS 1269 the room assisting individual children in six: aides were preparing attractive bulletin boards or had prepared them in 16; one aide was helping administer a standardized reading test in another; and in at least one class, an aide was seen preparing material for the teacher to use. The children in the three schools were white, with only one exception. They appe~red to be of a higher socio-economic status than most of the aides. The aides seemed to be very well accepted by the children. The principals told of a measure of bewilderment and confusion among the teachers, at first, as to the function of the aides, the relationship between the teacher and the aide, and some trepidation among at least a few of some possible threat to themselves in terms of status. Not only had these feelings largely disappeared by October 19, but it has been replaced by acceptance mounting to enthusiasm in many instances. In one case it was expressed by a teacher in the words, "I couldn't get along without her." One device which assisted the principals and teachers in understanding the possible functions of an aide was the distribution of the Study Questionnaire to everyone who would be using an aide in the Pi'actidum. The research director reported that teachers were able to select a number of uossible functions for aides to perform from this questionnaire. The daily schedule differed between different periods of the program. In the period through Otcober 8, roIl call and collection of assignments began the day. From 8 :45 to 9 :30 job orientation took place, followed by a 15 minute recess; 9 :45 to 11 :00 was devoted to contemporary affairs, a film, or a guest speaker. At 11 :00 counseling was required except on Thursday. Luncheon was from 12 noon to 1 :30 p.m. followed by occupational skills on Monday; a free period for read- ing and study on Tuesday; counseling on Wednesday until 3 :30 when office ma- chine operation and visual aide equipment operation lasted until 6 :00; on Thurs- day the afternoons were devoted to a film and/or reading in the schools. Beginning October 10 all students were in the schools for a practicum session lasting from 8 :00 a.m. until noon. Seminars took a larger place in the daily schedule during the two weeks of practicuni. Many of the items listed in the previous weeks' routine continued. Job orientation took first place in the content of the training, covering class- room aides, library aides, clerical aides. and home liaison work. Orientation was achieved through much classroom discussion, through speakers from com- munity organizations, through correlation with the work in child growth and development, through visits to homes with the five home-school liaison trainees, through practical projects of various kinds, and finally through instruction in manuscript writing. In counseling the trainees were given achievement testing and individual inter- views. For two weeks they attended a child growth and development class for one hour including lectures, discussion. and films. Small groups of ten each met twice during the third week of the program. These meetings were followed by seminars and work with individuals. In the course on contemporary affairs occurred one of the highlights of the program; the film, "Harvest of Shame," a documentary on migrant life, brought a dramatic response from the trainees. At the beginning of the program they had been hesitant to acknowledge their identification with migrants. They had even objected to the word "migrant" in the title of the project. A little later during a discussion of what "migrant" means, many admitted having experienced some- thing of migrant life. After the film was shown a number spoke in resentment of the injustices they had known and observed. From that time the training appeared to have more meaning to the trainees. In the course on audio-visual aids the values of showing films and using other media were demonstrated. The principal types of equipment were introduced: the overhead projector, the opaque projector. the filmstrip/slide projector, and the 16 mm film projector. The class divided into five groups to work with this equipment. Another area of occupational skills was taught. Office competency covered telephone courtesy, typing. spirit duplicator use, paper cutting, mimeo- graphing, and the use of the thermofax machine. Classes w-ere also conThwted on the role of the teacher aide in reading instruction, in health, and in grammar. The program was followed up by the staff in a variety of ways. Staff ~sited the school superintendents in the counties from which the trainees were seleted. The study instrument was used by staff to help interpret to local school adminis- trators the possible uses of aides in the classroom. Wherever possible, guarantees PAGENO="0448" 1270 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS of employment for aides was sought. This resulted in the eventual employment of 11 trainees as classroom aides, three as luncheon aides with the assurance that they would be placed in classrooms as soon as funds were secured, and place- ment of five trainees as aides in day care centers. Other trainees are currently employed as nurses' aides, day maids, and some have returned to work in the fields. The staff visited the trainees who had not yet been able to find employment in their county school systems to offer advice and encouragement. In one county, no employment was available in the locality in which three trainees lived, but promise of employment was offered in a town 20 miles away. None of the three aides had access to transportation to this town in order to complete the initial interview. After a visit from staff, the trainees were motivated to seek trans- portation. IMPRESSIONS OF THE PROGRAM The aii1e~z bubbled with enthusia sm over many aspects of the program. After the practicum experience, some comments were: "No white person ever called me Mrs.' before." They treated me with respect." "I got more money mop- ping floors in a hospital, hut I chose this because I am really helping children." "I never had an opportunity before." "I like this work because I like people." The aiiles did have some suggestions for improving the program: 1) conduct a six-week training course, followed by inservice training, and then a refresher course in the fall: 2) the occupational training course should include instruc- tion in all types of office machines used in business: 3) more courses should be given so that an aide could select those he would need most in his specific job assignnient: 4) they believed they should be given a title. In the conference of the project staff and the visiting team the question arose as to the wisdom of attempting to elevate the status of the trainees. A con- serisus was reached that a delicate balance must be preserved between the self- image of the aides and their newly emerging identification w-ith the middle-class group. It was g~nerally believed that it would be a mistake to raise the trainees' hopes too high : better to helo them to adjust individually. The ultimate goal of all working in this field, the group believed, should be improving the condi- tion of migrants asaw hole. The future development of each trainee depends largely on each getting and holding a job. The project (lirector brought out the major weaknesses of the program: 1) the fnilu"e to discover trainees more closely and more recently associated with mi- grant life. 2) the lack of teacher participants in the program, 3) the lack of guaranteed employment foi' trainees upon successful completioa of the program, and 4) inadequate time for preplanning. The Director of Continuing Education expressed the desire to have a more integrated group of trainees in terms of ethnic origin. Moreover, he believed it would be valuable to conduct the practicum in classes in which the children were (lisadvantaged rather than largely white and largely middle class. He would like to have had more Negroes on the staff on a full-time basis whom he had been unable to recruit for this project in the limited time for preplanning. He and others questioned why the pro~ram was the fine success it was. One factor w-as the quality of the trainees. The director stated that they had forced the staff to give them their best. He might have added that the staff were capable of giving a great deal when their best was demanded. PROFILE OF A PROJECT FOR TRAINING Auxu.IAi~Y SCHOOL PERSONNEL AS FAMILY AIDES (Sponsored by The Delinquincy Study and Youth Development Project of Southern Illinois University, Edwardsville, Illinois) RATIONALE Highest in the percentage of families with income less than $3,000 a year in the state of Illinois, East St. Louis (St. Clair County) presents a striking prob- lem of poverty and all its related deprivation. It has the highest percentage of high school dropouts in the state: it ranks second to Chicago in the number of persons receiving Aid to Dependent Children benefits; and takes the same rank PAGENO="0449" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1271 position in the number of unemployed. (Demographic Study of Poverty in Il- linois, Illinois Office of Economic Opportunity, 1965). The significance of the last item quoted above is expressed in a recent study which reveals that almost one fourth of all household heads in East St. Louis have no jobs. (Employment and Unemployment in. East St. Louis, Public Administration and Metropolitan Affairs Office, Southern Illinois University, 1964). The directors of the Delinquency Study and Youth Development Project had three other facts in mind when the need for family aides came forcibly to their attention, namely, (1) the community leads all others in the state in the per- centage of persons over 25 years of age with less than eight years of education, (2) the severe shortage of trained school personnel at all levels, and (3) the need for better communication between parents of disadvantaged children and teachers and social workers. The Delinquency Study and Youth Development Project was carrying on a Curriculum Development Program for Preschool Aides for the U.S. Office of Education when the present program was proposed. Some of the components of the development program were to be part of the new project. School District #189 and the Economic Opportunity Commission of East St. Louis, in particular the Neighborhood Youth Corps, were to cooperate in the project to train family aides. Great care and effort were taken by the project staff from March 28 to July 7, 1966 to bring about mutual understanding and active cooperation be- tween the agencies and persons who would be involved in the project when it was inaugurated. The superintendent of School District #189 and the social workers of that district were involved primarily. During July and August meet- ings were held with four principals, four teachers, four social workers and six Parents of District #189, to discuss the role and functions of the family aide. PURPOSE One clear purpose ran through all the planning and preparation for the proj- ects to train auxiliary school personnel as family aides, namely, to develop better school-home communication and consequent mutual understanding between parents and teachers. That such communication and understanding will aid in the implementation of the school program for socially disadvantaged children constituted a fundamental conviction underlying the whole program. COMPOSITION OF PARTICIPANT GROUP5 The trainees consisted of 48 family aide aspirants in 8 schools. The original group consisted of 24 trainees from the Neighborhood Youth Corps. They ranged in age from 18 to 21 years. It was decided that the need for family aides was so great that an additional 24 aides should be given the training. The school district requested more mature aides so experienced persons were recruited, especially aides or volunteers from past and current Head Start programs. Of the 24 mature trainees, 13 were from families below the poverty level. All 24 Neighborhood Youth Corps aides were below the poverty level. SELECTION AND RECRUITMENT The trainees were chosen mainly from the indigenous poor, both from the Neighborhood Youth Corps and from the Title I ESEA group, not excluding high school dropouts. The criteria for selection w-ere adapted from the pre- dictors of success in the Curriculum T)evelopment Program. Among the cri- teria the following formed some of the basis for screening: level of verbal ability, level of reading comprehension, attitudes toward children and family life, attitudes toward peers, and attitudes toward institutions and involvement in community organizations. Criteria for selection and for training crystalized in part from the assurance that the trainees might find employment within School District #159. Plan- ning was to continue after the abstract for the proposal was drawn up, wit.h administrators, social workers. principals and teachers of the school district. The project staff consisted of an administrative director, a coordinator-in- structor, a process analyst, two process observers. and a secretary. There was part-time involvement of eight school teachers, four I)rillcipals, amid four social workers in developing the program. 75-492-67-pt. 2-29 PAGENO="0450" 1272 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS In the words of the project proposal: "Coupling a team teaching approach with visiting specialists in various fields will produce a ratio of one staff mem- ber to six trainees, or an equivalent of three full-time staff members. During the initial four-week training phase one staff member will be working full time with the trainees as instructor and coordinator; in the practicum phase this individual will continue at half time with professional school personnel fihlimw the other half-time supervisory function". STRUCTURE OF THE PROGRAM Setting Classroom and office space were provided by Southern Illinois University. The Delinquency and Youth Development Project offered opportunities to ob- serve in six preschool readiness centers. Faculty members of the University gave consultation in a number of specialties. Observation and practicum oppor- tunities, as well as consultation with school personnel in relevant fields, were irovided by School District #189. The program in ontline The plan proposes three main phases for the program: (1) the exploratory and planning phase: (2) the training phase; and (3) on-the-job follow up. The first phase lasting from July 1 to September 1, 1966 included the develop- ment of parent-teacher-social worker-principal dialogues, composed of personnel employed in the East St. Louis Head Start Program. The objectives included exploring the possibilities of the method to develop inter-cultural communica- tion: the attitude of professional school personnel toward socially disadvan- tared children and their families and toward working with personnel selected from the indigenous poor: the attitudes of the poor toward working within the school setting: and techniques for the observation and analysis of interaction and change within the sensitivity groups themselves. Discussion was continued with public school and Delinquency Study and Youth Development Project personnel to define the role of the family aide and to assess the value of aides to these agencies. The second was the training phase, lasting through the fall school semester, October 3, 1966-January 27, 19437. In it the participants in the program were trained as family aides and taught such clerical and technical skills as are necessary for reporting to school personnel and aiding in the development of parent programs for preschool through grade 3. Mutual awarness, respect and communication between parents, trainees, teachers, principals and social workers were developed in sensitivity grou~)s. In all of this training the intent was to continue the inquiry into the role of the family worker and the process of intercultural communication. The training phase had two aspects: preservice and inservioe. Preservice training included four weeks of lectures, discussions, demonstrations, films, role playing, and observations in preschool centers and the first three grades in school. The preservice training was followed by a twelve-week supervised work experi- ence and continued inservice training. Third among the phases of the program, that of on-the-job follow-up, was to he carried n in the spring school semester February 1 to May 30, 19437. The East St. Louis $cliü~l District #189 has hired the trainees. The trainees will be followed-up and an evaluation made of the program by the Delinquency Study and Youth Development Project and the trainees' employer. Both the develop- ment and the research findings will be made by the Delinquency Study and Youth Development Project. Field experience will be carried on in connection with School District #189 and supervision will be carried on by the School District and the Delinquency Study and Youth Development Project. Participant observers, it was planned. would join the training program and sensitivity groups to provide feedback to the program analyst on trainee atti- tudes, response to the training program and the trainees' view of the role of the family aide prior to and after employment. Data on children's classroom behavior, achievement and attendance would be gathered before the practicum and after the family aides had contact with parents. Data on the trainees' perseverance would he evaluated in terms of attendance, completion of the PAGENO="0451" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1273 training program, and subsequent involvement in employment as aides. Parents' attendance at the school functions would be a measure of the effectiveness of the family aide program. FFNCTIONS TO BE PERFORMED A. &`hooi setting 1. Clerical Duties: Keeping attendance records, Filing materials, Keeping inventories. Typing, Duplicating materials, Collecting milk money and other funds. 2. Room Maintenance: Helping children get out and put away materials, Keeping food utensils clean (juice containers, etc.). Inspecting equipment for repairs, Setting up equipment, Keeping stock supplies in order. 3. Instructional Assistance: Making visual aids, Making scrap books and other materials, Maintaining bulletin boards; arranging displays and exhibits, Operating equipment: projectors, record players, tape recorders, Selecting books from library, Collecting pictures, leaves, rocks. etc. 4. Self-Help Assistance: Supervising bathroom requirements, Helping to take off and put on clothing. Giving minor first aid. Assisting with rest period, Assisting children with food preparation and eating. B. Home community cenitacts 1. Assistance in the Development of Parent Meetings: Conducting a survey among parents to determine type of meeting and content they are interested in: Providing baby-sitting services in the school so parents can attend the meetings; Providing pre- and post-meeting contact; Duplicating notices and parent education materials to be distributed at parent meetings; Helping set UI) demonstration and display materials; Operating audio-visual equipment. 2. Assistance to Teacher in Individual Parent Conferences: Providing in-schood baby-sitting service to parent who is visiting in the school. 3. Home Visits to Accomplish the Following: Providing positive family contact, letting the parents know some of the things the child does well; Developing understanding of the school through vis-a-vis contact with new parents as a supplement to teacher contact; Providing the teacher with a greater familiarity with the child's parents and home environment through feedback from home visits; Providing contact for children with short term illnesses, taking home- work assigned by teachers and encouraging family to help child keep up with school work; Alerting social workers regarding parents who appear to he in need of referral to other agencies; Arranging appointments for social worker with parents of children who appear to have school related problems. PAGENO="0452" 1274 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS INSTRUCTIONAL CONTENT FOR TRAINING PROGRAM To prepare the trainee to perform the multiple possible functions listed above, content in the following areas was contemplated: A. Human development and relationships 1. Children: Infancy and preschool-normal, Later childhood-normal, Child guidance, Deviants. 2. Adult: Human relationships, Human needs, Development of good relationships. 3. Parent and Society: Race-problems and solutions, Socio-economic level-problems and solutions, Social agencies. 4. Relating Self to Others: Professional school personnel to parents, Manners, attitudes, self-knowledge. B. School system: structure, function, educationa' techniques 1. Goals, legal responsibilities and relationships of professional school personnel: Principal, Social workers, Teachers. 2. Teaching and learning process: How acconiplished from preschool through grade 3, Techniques and materials teachers use to aid skill development. Curriculum and social development in children-progression of learning from preschool through grade 3. 3. Home-school relationships: Parents contact, meetings, newsletters. C. Technical and general skills 1. Operation of audio-visual equipment and development of skills in prepara- tion and display of material for bulletin boards and parent meetings, 2. Operation of duplicating machines, 3. Speech, reading, manuscript writing, 4. Records and record keeping. D. Sensitivity and communication train.ing oBsERvATIoNS The Study Team visited 11 classes in session in three schools, six in Dunbar, two in Longfellow, and three in Monroe. Eleven observations were a relatively smafl number when viewed in the light of the total number of classes in the three first grades in the schools. More particularly, the period of time spent in observation was small when compared with the purpose of noting the full process of activities in the classes, the specific purposes in the minds of the teachers, and the results that might follow incidents seen momentarily by the observers but in long term perspective by the teachers. In some measure this limitation in the coverage of the observation was compensated for by the answers given to questions put to teachers, principals, and staff of the project. In addition, a caveat must be voiced concerning the duration of the work ex- perience prior to observations. Aides had been on the job only two weeks when PAGENO="0453" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1275 they were observed. Classes were held from 9 AM to 3 PM. The actual activities observed are tabulated below. Size of class Activities Dunbar. Longfellow. Monroe, 29to34 26to42 27to35 Interaction between teacher and aid 3 1 Collecting milk money 1 i Cutting papers principally for bulletin hoard use, also phonic aids 4 2 Dittoing 1 Mimeographing 1 Preparing border of roons 1 Preparing bulletin hoard 4 Taking care of chlld who has hadan accident 1 1 Passing papers.~ 1 Assisting a chlld with seat work I 1 Observbsg teacher's methods with class 1 Helping chlldren with coats 1 Going to restless child 1 Calling the roll 1 Taking over class under teacher supervision 1 Bringing 1 absent child up to date 1 Attending to imanediateneedofchlld 1 Having conferences on report cards 1 i Reviewing work on capital and small letter 1 Using pointer Arranging hooks on shelves I Putting cards inlibrary books 1 Noi~.-tf the classes instead of the schools had been used as the basis of differentiation 1 class in Dunhar would have shown up as presenting the majority of items checked: 1 class (i.e.. 1 aide~ in Longfellow would have shown up as responsible for 7 of the 10 items checked. The total number of items checked are arranged in the following tabulation under the major categories found in the planned activities. The items appearing on a list prepared by one teacher in Monroe is also presented to show the teach- er's attitude toward functions of an aide. (Interpretation of proper inclusion of items under the planned categories may not be identical with the thinking of planners or teachers). Planners' categories of activities isa the schools Dunbar Longfellow Monroe Worksheet frons teaclser in Monroe 1. Clerical duties 2. Room maintenance 3. Instructional assistance 4. Self-help assistance 2 S 5 1 5 3 1 1 2 7 2 21 The greatest liklelihood of misplaced items lies between 1, Clerical duties, and 3, Instructional assistance, due to the similarity of obvious clerical work and clerical aspects of instructional activities. Nevertheless the category, Instruc- tional assistance, shows up in both observations and the Monroe teacher's work- sheet as outweighing the comparative emphasis put on it in the planning of the program. Furthermore at the Dunbar school "instructional assistance" presents itself as one of two main categories, despite the principal's insistence that the state law forbids it. Clearly there must be the need for the function and the recognition of its practicability by the teachers when they are in the classroom. This appears to be a difference in interpretation as to what "instructional assist- ance" actually means. It is a term which permits various interpretation. PAGENO="0454" 1276 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS A. Reaetion-s of the aides in group interview * What the aides wanted to do was revealed in the interviews with them. It differed markedly from the picture gained in the classrooms. For one thing aides reported performing more functions than the study team observed. Both the Neighborhood Youth Corps trainees and the Title I trainees wanted changes made to allow them to take a more important role than planners or teachers had assigned them. To make clear the similarities and differences between the reactions of Neigh- borhood Youth Corps and Title I trainees, their responses are put in parallel columns. NEIGHBORHOOD YOUTH CORPS-TITLE I (2 of the female trainees of Title I were white, one male was white, the others were Negroes. All Neighborhood Youth Corps trainees were Negro.) Answers to the question: What do you do that you enjoy? Working projectors. because I like working with machines. `Teaching small groups, drilling on wor(ls and sOUn(1." `Working with slow pupils gets on my nerves." "Working with slow groups. Helped one pupil iiiove from ~ir(I to 2nd group." Succeeded in getting a boy to read." Grading papers before the principal sai(l we couldn't do it." Eeading stories : sitting afl(l talking to children about the stories.'' "Talking quietly when the teacher talks loud." "helping with art work." `Making home visits." `1 took a child home." "Bringing food for Thanksgiving." `Teaching singing of `School Days'." "1 lelping childi'en practice." Several helped one child. All: Making and running ditto stencils. All: Having children show money. Answers to the question: What in the program would you like to Change? Extend time of aides on ~ob so aides could get more pay." `Teachers would like us to have more rime." "We want to do more things than we are allowed to now." `~flo home visits : have done none yet." 1 )iscuss how to approach pai'ent on home visits." `Discuss how to act when teacher is down on one child.'' Answers to the question: Would you like a chance to work and continue studying part time? Group divided: too hard to work and study at same time. Answer to the question: Do you have enough time to talk to teachers on the job? "Yes, at recess and lunch." To summarize the answers of the aides, they all seemed to want to engage in a more diversified program of activities than had been assigned to them. Home visits were especially pleasing to the Title I group and were desired by the Neighborhood Youth Corps. Some members of both sections of the aides liked to work with groups and also individual pupils. Neighborhood Youth Corps train- ees sp ke more of tasks involved in the teaching process and desired to get prep- :iration for them than did the Title I trainees. This may have been because they had more experience in that type of work. There was evidence in the re- marks of a very few that they liked to try to "show up" the teacher. IMPRESSIONS OF PROGRAM FROM VARIOUS SOURCES \Iake more home visits." "Flave a common car to make visits ~vith." `Fo learning games." "(~rade papers: 6th to 7th gi'ade pupils do." "\ ~ in modern math." `More preservice instruction." (many) `Pipservice instruction on use of the bulletin hoard." *The group interview' wpre conducted by th~ chairman of the Visitation Team. PAGENO="0455" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1277 B. Reactions of the professional teachers in group interview Opinions and attitudes of the teachers varied considerably, but taken as a whole were favorable to the program. A few maintained that there was a period during which the children needed to get adjusted. The children in the schools had had no kindergarten experience and the teachers believed that, for that rea- son, the children may have been afraid the aides would not give them the same love as do the teachers. On the other hand, some teachers said their children had accepted the aides readily. In one case the aide was older than the teacher, had children of her own, and appeared to fit right in. In another case an aide who was a father quickly adapted to the classroom context, with positive results. Good things were said by a number of the teachers concerning the work of the aides: "They give individual attention to the children"; "Things seem to dovetail better; less time is spent in getting materials"; "As the aide goes around he children understand the instructions given out by the teacher better"; and, importantly, "One child who was thought to be deaf was found by the aide to be withdrawn". Limitations, due primarily to the restrictive state law, were voiced by a few. Two said they could allow aides to (10 nothing related to instruction. One stated that an aide can relate, not teach. "When one of them takes charge of a group, that is teaching." A fiat footed statement came from one, "Aides should be pro- fessional." Looking to the future, however, one teacher voiced the hope that the approach could be made uniform all over town. One half the teachers did not have trainees; from among them came the eager request: "When will we have aides?" C. Restrictions expressed in. T-groups * (sensitivity groups) The T-groups served the purpose of "letting off steam" according to one family aide. They dealt with human relations rather than job-related discussion; they were essential in a project introducing new workers into an established in- stitution because they opened up for common consideration the dynamics of role development. The session observed by the study team was attended by six mem- bers of the Neighborhood Youth Corps, six of the Title I group, four teachers, one principal, four parents, one social worker, process observers, researchers, an~ the discussion leader. The planners of the project had assigned to this group the function of eliciting the truth about matters which disturbed the participants, even if it proved difficult to express heir criticism and even if it might be hard to take when directed against an individual. The leader renmarked at the session observed that his role was to interpret to the group why they w-ere attacking each other or the program. Attack, analysis. and understanding seemed to he the sequence the communications took. For example: conflict between the Neighborhood Youth Corps and the Title I group of trainees relating to the labeling of the groups in the routine of pay- ments was brought out. The next day a human relations expert spoke to the two groups, and was followed on the succeeding (lay by honest communications between the group members. The more mature Title I aides and the profes- sional participants were defensive of the school system when its routines w-ere brought into question. Another problem the group w-as called upon to discuss was the feeling of job insecurity on the part of an aide, his concern over the continuity of his job, and the likelihood of political implications in the arrange- ments for the job. One discussion dealt with the fear of certain teachers of another adult in the classroom. Another concern of the T-groups was the charge by an aide that the teacher "is teaching Johnny wrong". The majority of Title I aides maintained in the Group Tnterview that they enjoyed the T-group sessions. One lady said. "I don't like them, hut they may turn out O.K. for me". Thei'e seemed to be a growing realization that the T- group was a method of solving problems that was not in time beha vior pattern of the participants. A complaint w-as raised that there was an in-group and an out-group in the meetings. One aide remarked that in her T-group four or five had not spoken. fl. Reactions of seperintendeaf of schools "I am convinced that eventually the teacber's i'e~pon~ihility will he changed. The teacher's job will he to direct the process. In Illinois we are constantly *J~ the T-Group the visitatinn team were ohsei'vers. tiot leaders. The grnups were led by efa~ on a reriilar ~c'hednle after schooL PAGENO="0456" 1278 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS reminded that we have to call aides `clerical aides'. There must be legislation in 1967 to give aides a. place in the school." E. Reactio~s of visitation team 1. Requests of aides should be seriously considered: (a) to know more about the mental make up (especially emotional factors) of children before their service begins; (b) to be given more instruction in certain specific areas of their duties such as decorating the bulletin boards. 2. The request of some teachers for more training in what to expect of an aide was a valuable comment. 3. Also significant was the desire expressed by both aides and teachers that they should have time to meet as teams after working together in the classroom to review their common experience and plan together. 4. Rapport and creativity seemed to flow from the frankness of the T- Group sessions and from the dedication and ability of the instructional staff. Mr. CAuvy. Will Monsignor Donohue. Monsignor McManus, and Mr. Cic.c.o resume their testimony, and Mr. Considine? Monsignor DOXOHUE. Mr. Chairman, Congressman Carey, we had conchided our formal statement, and we are in the process of answering any questions the committee might have.. Mr. CAREY. When we recessed, I was addressing a question to the panel in general, that anyone can answer, if you will. First, on the question of Operation He.adstart, and Followthrough, what has been your experience, in terms of mounting community sup- port, getting community support, and effectuating successful pro- grams for I-Teadstart and Followthrough, in your contact with the programs themselves and the public educational agencies and the community Monsignor Doxoiivv. Yes. I would like to ask both Mr. Cicco and Monsignor McManus, who have l)een working on these programs ever since their inception, in both Chicago and Pittsburgh, and whose knowledge of the kind of things that. you are asking is very broad, t.o speak to this. First. Monsignor McManus. Monsi~nor MCMANUS. Mr. Carey. we have 900 children in a child development. program. tinder a subcontract. with t.he Chicago Com- mittee on Economic. Opportunity, which in turn is funded by the OEO. I feel that now that. we are in the third year of our operation, t.hat our experience has given us reason to claim an extraordinary degree of success. The essential aspect, in my mind, of the. child development program, is that it is much more than a child program, and much more than a. school program. Three major components in our program are the master teacher, the. social worker, and t.he family life educator. We have approximately 20 in each category, for our program, and from our experience, we are. fully persuaded that we will do little good for these 4-year-old children unless we simultaneously reach their par- ents: and the parental response, thus far, has been most rewarding. Our discipline, is strict. We are more strict with the parent.s than we. are with the children. rFlle parents who refuse to cooperate are at. least. threatened with having their children and themselves expelled from our program. The program is operated according to OEO terms, along strictly nonsectarian lines. Children of all denominations are eligible, and the teachers are employed without regard to religious denomination. PAGENO="0457" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTJCATION AMENDMENTS 1279 The. program, therefore, has given us a chance to respond to the call of our Government for mobilization of our best. resource.s in the war against poverty. We were invited to come into this, we did not. seek it. And we are pleased that we have accepted the invitation. So our community re- sponds that of all the. OEO programs, that. has received the widest acclaim. This perhaps is due to the appeal of the 4-year-old child, but I would attribute it. as well to a deeper reason: that is, that. there is mounting evidence, as we learn more and more. of the science of child development., that reaching a youngster with a compensatory education program at the age of 4 and following through on it, at. least to the fourth grade, at which time we would like to have the child on grade level, as I explained earlier today, fairly well guarantees that t.he boy or girl will not be a high school dropout.. Not being a high school dropout will give this youngster an opportunity, t.hen, to move into employment in our presently affluent. society. So I heartily endorse t.he child development program, and hope that it will remain under the jurisdict.ion of the Office of Economic Opportunity. Monsignor DoNolluE. Mr. Cicco. Mr. Cioco. Congressman Carey, we probably have a very unique situation in Pit.tsburgh. We a.re involved in summer He.a.dstart. In fact,, all of the fleadsta.rt, programs conducted in Pittsburgh during t.he summer are conducted by private schools. Public. schools do not conduct any summer Headstart. Now t.he Catholic, diocese last. year served some IMOO youngsters, and had been aske.d a.gain this year to serve some 1,300 youngsters in the city of Pittsburgh imde.r the summer Headstart. program. We have been very happy to participate, and we feel that we have made a tremendous c.ontribution to the community as evidenced by the eval- uat.ions that. have bee.n submitted by the community to the Mayor's Committee on Human Resources, through which we subcontract., and published. The evaluations have been excellent. I feel as Monsignor Mc.Manus that. the followthrough is very important. This is only the beginning, and I also feel as Monsignor Mc.Manus that this program should stay under OEO, because in this area, we are able to do with more flexibility what. we cannot. do under ESEA. We c.a.n use our resources, and bot.h physical and personal, to great advantage for the betterment of the community. Mr. CAREY. Would I be correct., then, in assuming that if the rec- ommendation that. the J-Tea.dstart, program, in toto, be assigned to the Office of Education, and that all the programs, summer and year- round, be conducted through the system of public education, this would be an end and a writeoff of your records thus far? Mr. Cioco. Well, all I can sa.y, Congressman, is that. a.t. the present time, the public schools in Pittsburgh do not. operate a summer Head- start program, so if it. were to be placed under ESEA, under it.s present restrictions, then we, in fact, could not operate them. Now, whether they would be taken up by the public, schools, I don't know. I can only tell you what is happening at this time. Monsignor DoNoiruE. I t.hink our position would be, Congressman, that if the Headstart program were transferred to the Office of Edu- PAGENO="0458" 1280 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDME~PS cation, and its management and its implementation were restricted by title I concepts, for instance, that we would have to be strenuously opposed to it. Under title I, of course, no pubic agency could con- tract with a private agency to conduct the program, and this would really tie our hands in offering any kind of viable, valid service to the community. Monsignor Monsignor MCIMIANUS. I recall, Congressman, a similar question in 1946, when the issue was the school lunch program. Congressman Flanagan at that time was the chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, and lie asked, "If the progam were transferred from the Department of Agriculture to the Office of Education, would the parochial school children eat?" and the answer was negative. He said, "Well, then, the lunch program will remain in the De- partment of Agriculture," where it. remains today. I could say the parallel fashion that. if the program were trans- ferred from the. OEO to the Office of Education, the decided prob- ability would be t.hat the nonpublic agencies, not. only t.he church- related agencies, but all the other nonpublic agencies which have made a record in this, would he denied the opportunity to respond t.o their Government's call in the war against poverty. Mr. CAREY. Well, the chairman will note that because of the need for members to attend to other duties, we will he forced to suspend the hearings at this point., by reason of our inability to maintain a quorum, but. in closing the hearing, let. me state this: that. I feel that it will be unwise for me in the chair to operate with this particular panel, anyway, which could he described as ultra vires, or in any way except in a format. of meticulous legality, which is not one of the corn nients that I was in the chair any way cooperating in anything but a wholly constitutional and legal way and proceeding in a correct way with t.his particular panel, or any witness to come before the committee a.t this time. However. I do want to make this statement. for the record, that I feel that. we have, before us two problems, and one is that we must act upon a bill, and move a program by extension in order that the obviously well-working features of the program can be extended through legislative and other ac.ts on the part of the States, and that. there is need for us, therefore, to be expeditious in moving the bill. On the other hand, in a very real sense, this bill has uncove~d more problems and more dept.h of challenge than we probably knew was in existence when we first began our deliberations on the original 1)ill in 1965. Therefore, I would hope that the committee in its wisdom would engage in a more professional and more extensive reading and dis- covery operation on t.he subsurface and long-term challenges in edu- cation today, long-term problems that need to be surfaced in education t od a v. We heard at. least one witness from this panel, and another, a dis- tinguished educator from Bank Street, indicate that there was need to inject competition for the good of the student into American education. I would wholly second that. In fact, I believe we could spend a day or possibly a week or more, on what kind of competition would be PAGENO="0459" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1281 realistic, and what kind of competition would be truly beneficial to the system and to the student. This is one example of what might be done. I also want to indicate my present dissatisfaction from the degree of attention that we are able to give to the questions of special educa- tion and handicapped children in this portion of limited hearings. I would hope that by reason of the readiness now in the presentation of the report of the task force of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare on the problems of handicapped children, that we could assign some time in the committee to gain the day or week or more to the single consideration of how the progress and how to address our- selves to legislation along the lines suggested in this new report.. So my intent is to convey the opinion that there is far more here that needs to be done than we can accomplish in these hearings. I do want to commend the panel before us for their very positive contribution, in terms of a constructive statement on the working of ESEA as we now see it in operation. I feel that the very limitation in terms of comprehensiveness of the statement itself leaves something to be desired. There is much more that you can tell us, that you have not told us. There is much more that~ I feel we can learn from you that we have not learned. There is much more that needs t.o be discussed, in terms of how the bill is work- ing, and how it can work better, and how it is not working, and I there- fore feel that once we get this bill on its legislative way, we should begin again. We should resume detailed hearings into the facets of interest and the facets of challenge that have presented themselves to us by reason of the.se highly cursory and surfactant-type hearings. I think that we are really just skimming the surface, because that. is all there is time to do at this time, but I hope that the NCWC and kindred groups would cooperate with those of us who want to go more deeply into the challenges and into the problems and into the successes and into the opportunities that we. know- are there. by reason of our experience in this bill. I know I will have that assurance froni this particular group. The committee will st.and in recess until 9 :30 a.m. tomorrow. (Whereupon, at 4:30 p.m., a recess was taken until tomorrow, Thursday, March 16, 1967, at 9:30 a.m.) PAGENO="0460" PAGENO="0461" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS OF 1967 THURSDAY, MARCH 16, 1967 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITrEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR, Wa8hington, D.C. The committee met at 9 :30 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Carl D. Perkins (chairman of the committee) presiding. Present: Representatives Perkins, Green, Ford, Meeds, Ayres, Quie, (Ioodell, Bell, Gurney, Erlenborn, Scherle, Dellenback, Gardner, and Steiger. Staff members present: Robert E. McCord, senior specialist; H. D. Reed, Jr., general counsel; William D. Gaul, associate general coun- sel; Benjamin F. Reeves, editor; and Louise 1\I. Da.rgens, research assistant. Chairman PERKINS. The committee will come to order. A quorum is present. Several witnesses have been delayed this morning getting in here. Dr. Buchanan is our first witness. STATEMENT OP PATJL BUCBA.NAN, SUPERINTENDENT OP SCHOOlS, JACKSON COITNTY, N.C. Mr. BUCHANAN. I do not have a prepared statement, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. We are delighted to welcome you here, Mr. Buchanan. Mr. BUCHANAN. Certainly I appreciate the opportunity to talk with you about the NTC program and we at the local level are pleased with you. The committee members will spend time studying these proposals that are made for Federal aid and gathering information that is vital in making decisions that are in the best interest of this country and to the educational programs. Chairman PERKINS. Tell us how the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, particularly title I, and particularly the Teacher Corps if you have taken advantage of it, and what has been your cx- pe rience with these programs. Mr. BUCHANAN. We have taken advantage of bot.h title I and the Teacher Corps and we have foand that they have assisted our pro- grams very greatly. When we were given the opportunity of incorporating the National Teacher Corps into our program we were skeptical at first and we proceeded with caution. 1283 PAGENO="0462" 1284 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Frankly we questioned the wisdom of becoming involved. We also recognized that we had an obligation to do all we could to meet the needs of our pupils. Chairman PERKINS. Right at that point, from the experience that you have gained since the Teacher Corps was inaugurated in your school system, have you discovered that your skepticism was un- founded at the outset? Mr. BUCHANAN. Yes~ sir; we have found that. We have found that this program has done something for a group of children that per- haps we could not have done in any other way and it has been done in a very satisfactory way. Chairman PERKINS. I think that is a very significant statement. You are recommending the broadening of t.he Teacher Corps, that the Congress enact the Teacher Corps amendment as being proposed at the present time; is that right.? Mr. BUCHANAN. Yes, sir; we are very definitely recommending it. Chairman PERKINS. In the disadvantaged area of your city how many teachers and interns have you recruited into the corps? Mr. BUCHANAN. We have a. small rural school unit.. We only have 3,600 students in our school unit. We have recruited three teachers and three interns and a master teacher. Chairman PERKINS. Has there been any friction between your regu- lar teacher and the teacher that you recruited under the Teacher Corps? Mr. BUCHANAN. No, sir; there has not been. Before I had any idea that I would be a part of this hearing, of course, we asked our teachers to evaluate the program and they were very definite in their state- ments that. there has been no friction, that the relationship has been very good. I believe the word they used to describe it. was "beautiful." Chairman PERKINS. In the administration of title I in your school system have you had any difficulty with that? Has that proven t.o be a great advantage in your school system? Have you been able to put on special programs? Are you in a position to evaluate some good re- sults from that program? Mr. BUChANAN. Yes, sir; we are very pleased with title I because it has enabled us to put on special programs. Our most significant project. was in the area of language arts. It has enabled us to do the things that we were not able to do and could not have done had it not been for title I in this area. Chairman PERKINS. Do you care to make any further comment about the Elementary and secondary Education Act at this point? Mr. BUCHANAN. Nothing, Mr. Chairman, except to say it is very fine. We are taking advantage of title I, title II, and title III of the ESEA and they have not only supplemented our program but they have actually added new programs that we could not have had wit.hout it. Chairman PERKINS. Have you been able to work wit.h the guidelines issued by the Department in your area in North Carolina? Mr. BUCHANAN. We have had no trouble with the guidelines but I think we need to give your State department. of instruction some of the credit for the small amount of trouble we have had at the local level. They have been very helpful in helping us to work out the problems. PAGENO="0463" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1285 Chairman PI~xINs. You are telling the committee that you have only had a small amount of trouble in the great State of North Carolina in the administration of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and considering the guidelines issues from Washington and that your State department of education has worked out any small differences that existed between it as a result of the guidelines being issued? Mr. BUCHANAN. That is true. Chairman PERKINS. Are practically all of the districts in North Carolina now taking advantage of ESEA; or do you Imow ? Mr. BUCHANAN. I think that all of them do. I do not know for sure. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Ayres? Mr. AYRES. No quest.ions. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Brademas. Mr. BRADEMAS. I have no questions other than to express our appre- ciation to the witness. Chairman PERKINS. I think you have made an outstanding witness, especially coming from a rural community in North Carolina. Mr. BRADEMAS. Isn't it true that Mrs. Johnson was in your State yesterday? Mr. BUCHANAN. Ye.s, sir; she visited our NTC project. I would just like to add t.his statement, if I may, Mr. Perkins. Chairman PERKINS. Yes, sir; go ahead. Mr. BUCHANAN. We feel that if those who are vitally interested would visit our area and see our project that. they would be convinced that NTC does do the thing that it proposes to do, that it does add addi- tional opportunity for bringing opportunity to educationally dis- advantaged children, and that also it does t.his by encouraging the colleges to give special training tha.t~ is effective training to these interns and those who work with the disadvantaged. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much for that statement. Mr. Ford, any questions? Mr. FORD. No questions, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much for your appearance here this morning Professor Buchanan. We really appreciat.e your coming. WitTiout objection I would like to insert into the record a tele- gram I received from Theodore Sizer, of Harvard Fniversity. CAMBRIDGE, MASS. Hon. CARL PERKINS, Chairman, House Committee on Education and Labor, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.: Re hearings on National Teacher Corps. My apologies for failing to appear at yesterday's hearings. In brief compass my view is as follows: We need to provide new educational opportunities for children from low-income families is clear. The role of the teacher in realizing this high purpose is equally clear. We need a new generation of leaders in this special field if we are to assure this very substantial population of youngsters of the best in education. The Teacher Corps offers this prospect. Indeed, so crucial is this program that it is difficult for me to see how other efforts now underway at improving the educational opportunities for the poor can succeed unless we recruit and train substantial numbers of young people-both dedicated and competent-to teach them. Accordingly, I wish to endorse the Teacher Corps program and to urge that substantial funds be appropriated to see it through this critical phase. I am not only committed to the idea but hope that the program can be cast in such a PAGENO="0464" 1286 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS way as to permit the Harvard Graduate School of Education to play a significant part in realizing the aims of this legislation. THEODORE R. SIzER, Dean, Gqaduate Sohool of Eduoa~ion, Harvard University. Mr. PERKINS. Our next witness is Mr. Edward Kline. Mr. BRADEMAS. Might I ask unanimous c,onsent to insert in the rec- ord at this point, the fact that we are discussing the Teacher Corps and an editorial which concerned this in Life magazine, on that subject? Chairman PERKINS. Is there any objection to inserting the Life editorial? Hearing no objection, it is so ordered. (The document referred to appears on page 1719.) Chairman PERKINS. We will also place in the record at this point your complete statement., Mr. Buchanan. Mr. BLTHANAN. Thank you, sir. STATEMENT BY R. P. BUCHANAN, SUPERINTENDENT, JACKSON COUNTY SCHOOLS, SYLVA, N.C. I would like to thank you for giving me the opportunity to talk with you about the NTC program. We at the local level are pleased that you who have such a busy schedule will spend time on examining proposals and gathering in- formation that is vital in making decisions that are in the best interests of this country. I have prepared no statement to present to you but I would like to relate some of our experiences with NTC. When the idea of incorporating the National Teachers Corps into our program was presented to us, we were skeptical and proceeded with caution. Frankly, we questioned the wisdom of becoming in- volved. We recognized that we had an immediate obligation to do all we could to meet the needs of our pupils. We also knew that it was impossible to meet some of these needs because of the lack of financial assistance. NTC did offer another way of getting personnel and other help that we need. With sonie reluctance we began to examine the possibility of using what the NTC had to offer. "Midnight oil" was burned in examining their proposal of NTC to strengthen educational opportunities for children in areas with concen- trations of low-income families, and encourage colleges and universities to broaden their teacher preparation program. We were interested not only in the immediate effects this might have on our pupils, teachers, and other facets of our school program but also the aftereffects that it might have. We knew we had areas in our school unit that could qualify and that we needed all the help we could get to strengthen educational opportunity in many areas. We had conferences with the people from Western Carolina College, the college given the grant to train NTC in our State. This was not difficult to do because the college is located in Jackson County and they use one of our county schools as a laboratory school in the training of teachers. We wanted to see if they had indeed been able to recruit competent people for their program and if they had been able to organize their program in such a way as to broaden their teacher training program to the point that it would give special training in the teaching of the deprived. We were convinced that they had been able to do effective recruiting and that their training program would help train teachers to work with the deprived. After holding conferences with other superintendents in the area and discussing the opportunity offered by NTC with our school personnel, we decided to apply for a grant. We then burned some additional "midnight oil" in trying to incorporate the opportunity we now had into our program in an effective way. This program plan simply stated is to incorporate every phase of school that is relative to the community into this one activity. Through a cooperative effort among regular teachers, NTC personnel, college personnel. county school personnel and others to make of the self-contained classroom a modern-day institution in which many research people are involved. PAGENO="0465" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDfCATIOX AMENDMENTS 1287 We feel after operating this program in the Canada township. a remote area in Jackson County, N.C., on August 27, 1966, that we are making progress toward carrying out our aims and that NTC has made it possible for us to do this. It is my belief that NTC activities in the Canada school are demonstrating the effectiveness of this program. We feel that NTC has helped us strengthen the educational opportunities for children living in an isolated area with a concen- tration of low-income families, and that the college training program is effective in recruiting and preparing personnel to work with the deprived. In fact we have seen this area come alive because of what is being done this year. Chairman PF~nxINs. Mr. Cline, we are glad to welcome YOU here this morning. I see you have a prepared statement. Proceed in any manner you prefer. STATEMENT OF EDWARD L. CLINE, SR., ON BEHALF OF THE OMAHA TRIBE OF MACY, NEBR. Mr. CLINE. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before your committee, Mr. Chairman. I am Edward L. Clime, Sr. I am a member of the Omaha Tribe of Nebraska. I live on the Omaha Reservation at Macy, Nebr., where I am economical, financial, and family counselor for the tribe. For 4 years I have been a member of t.he local public elementary school board. I am here as the representative not only of my school board but also of the Tribal Council of the Omaha Tribe of Nebraska, which has financed my trip to Washington. ~Fhis year our school, wmth 275 to 300 children, both Indian and iion-Indian, has been very fortunate to have the services of a team from the National Teacher Corps. These dedicated and enthusiastic young people have made an invaluable contribution, not only to the academic education of our children, but to their everyday life and to the life of our community. In the school they have given individual help to more than one-third of our students who had fallen behind the rest of the group. This work they do, not only during regular school hours, but in hours which are taken from their own free time. They also travel several miles to tutor children in neighboring Winnebago community which has no Teacher Corps team. They have brought fresh enthusiasm and new methods and skills to our faculty. Once the faculty recognized the benefits they as well as the children were receiving from the work of the Teacher Corps team they were eager to cooperate and asked for additional help from the team. Teachers found that they could teach more effectively when the slow or difficult pupils were receiving extra help and were not holding back the class. They have given hearing tests to all our children, with the result. that a number of youngsters with previously unrecognized hearing defects are now receiving medical treatment w-hich will enable them to hear better and therefore learn better. They have instituted a program of uniform testing which will per- mit us to make a realistic evaluation of the job that is being done by our school, and will show up individual weaknesses in the children so that~ proper remedial help can be given to them. They made us aware of the need for a central library and led the drive to acquire books. As a result, our school now has its first school T5-492----07-pt. 2-30 PAGENO="0466" 1288 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS library with several thousand volumes. I myself have two boys at the school and since the library has been opened my TV watching has been seriously interfered with because my boys bring books home which they want me to read and discuss with them. I am very happy to give up the TV for this and very grateful to the Teacher Corps who instigated it. I am getting to know my boss better. I am sure this is true not only in my household, but that there are many other families being put to the test. In only a few months the Teacher Corps members have become a vital force in our community. Even young children are aware of why the Teacher Corps has come to us. One third-grader gave his answer "They're here to help us dumb guys." I can tell the committee that they are here to help all of us-dumb or otherwise. They have made themselves a part of our lives. They visit us in our house and we visit them in theirs. This is true especially of the children-it is nothing uncommon to see a Teacher Corps member walk down the street with five or six youngsters trailing after him. Mv boys have gone hunting several times with one of them. I don't know who was teaching whom on those outings. In the evenings the corpsmen attend community social activities, meetings. work with individual students, and conduct classes. There is presentl~- a sewing class, and literacy classes are being planned. We consider the work of the National Teacher Corps in our com- munity an asset we have profited from greatly and would greatly miss if we were to lose it. I understand the committee has before it a proposal to make Teach- er Corl)s teams availal)le to Bureau of Indian Affairs Schools as well as publi( schools. And on the basis of our experience, I strongly urge your support for this provision. Schools on or near Indian reserva- tions always laive (lifficulty in attracting qualified teachers to so remote a location. The Teacher Corps is one way to ease that problem. And it is especially valuable because it is designed to work with disadvantaged children arid is staffed by young people who want to work in just such commimities. We need the National Teacher Corps in our reservation. I am sure they are equally needed in hundreds of communities across the land. Chairman PERKn~s. You have made a very convincing statement, Mr. Cline. As a representative of your school board and especially concerning the fact that you have firsthand knowledge of the opera- tion of the Teacher Corps. Have you had any problems with the administration of the Corps or any difficulties with the Corps after our board of education em- ploved these teachers in the Teacher Corps ? Mr. Ci~xr. No. sir. Chairman PERKINS. Did they blend in well with the other teachers in your scllool sv~tem? Mr. Crixv. Yes, sir. Chairiiian PEnKINS. I think you have told the committee that they I )rought know-how that those disadvantaged children otherwise would not have obtained on the reservation and to all of the disadvantaged in the area. PAGENO="0467" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1289 Are you here recommending that we adopt the l)Ioposal concerning the national recruitment of the teachers and leaving it up to the local boards of education selection with the State boards to empioy those representatives of the Teacher Corps in vow local school systems? Do you feel that would do a good deal in the future toward elirninat.- ing some of the problems in the disadvantaged areas? Mr. CLINE. Ies, sir. Chairman PERKINS. It. would bring better teaching methods and cultural programs and enrichment programs to the disadvantaged areas which you do not now have? Mr. CLINE. Yes, sir. Chairman PERKINS. ITaci von been able to get any type of this iii- struction before the Teacher Corps came along ? had your local board of education been able to train and reciuit teachers especially to teach the disadvantaged Mr. CLINE. As I stated in my statenient, to get qualified people to ~ome to us just for the money is pretty hard for us to do because. of the. fact that we have a limited amount of money and for us to go out; and ti~v to recruit the teacher, the type, of people we need, it would cost us a lot of money we could not afford. We feel because the National Teacher Corps members are people who are not particularly interested in the nioiietarv benefits they mi2ht. receive but are so dedicated so as to tiv to go out. into these dis- advantaged areas to try to help in some spec~al way, ~n wInch they certainly have helped our community. Mr. BRADEMAS. I might say our clia i iiuian, Mr. Chine, must attend an important. House A(lministration Committee meeting at l() oclock. I might ask you just. a couple of quick questions. What is the be- ginning pay for a schoolteacher in your school system Mr. CLIXE. For teachers who have degrees our inty scale-we just adopted a new pay scale at our board meeting this past Monday iii~lit and they raised this to ~5,4OO per year. Chairman PERKINS. You have had trouble gettin~ quol ifiecl teach- ers to come in and teach in your schools at that i~y level is that correct ? i~[i~. CrANE. ~ies. Chairman PEriluNs. Mr. Brademas. Mr. BRADEMAS. Do von have any trouble in the relatioimship be- t\veen your Teacher Corps members and the teachers in your public sclìool system? Mr. CLIXE. I would not say we have lam d a imy t ron] 1e. As I said in my statement. here, once the teachers actually ~ot to know what these young people were trying to do in our system for our children right at. this point they are certainly putting a lot of work on the shoulders of ihese oung people in our system right now I)ecause they fully realize at this point, what good work they are (loin~ for our chuidren. Mr. BRADEMAS. Mrs. Green. Mrs. GREEN. I have no questions. Mr. GARDNER. Mr. Cline. may I commend von on a very fine state- ment and the work you are doing. Going back to your remarks concerning the Teacher Corps amid the job that you feel they have been able to accomplish in your area it PAGENO="0468" I 290 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTATTON AMENDMENTS would seem to me that the prime thing in your mind behind the Teacher Corps is the money available, that. you have been unable in your particular State to match these funds and consequently the Teacher Corps has come. in an(l hued a gap that you have. If this money were available and on a State level do you think your State would be able to carry on a similar type of program that is now beii~ furnished by the. Teacher Corps? Mr. CLINE. They might, but I seriously doubt that we would find the dedicated people as the corps members certainly are. I don't think that we would get the type of people that the National Teacher Corps has recruited to work in these disadvantaged areas. I seriously doubt that. it. would be a successful program if we had the money. Mr. GARDNER. Isn't it true that we find many dedicated people as yourself who are not in the Teacher Corps and I am sure you are not in it strictly for the monetary results. Mr. CrINE. I certainly believe what I said to be true. I am sure we could as a school board find the money to pay high salaries but I seriously doubt that we would have the. ability or the t.ime to go out and to recruit the type of people that the. National Teacher Corps is made up of. Mr. GARDNER. Thank you. Mr. BRADEMAS. Mr. Ford? Mr. FORD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Cline. while we have the advantage of your experience and background I would like to ask you a couple of questions on a matter that you touch on here but which is far hroacler than the simple question of the Teacher Corps. In this legislation it is proposed to include Bureau of Indian Af- fairs schools among districts eligible for the receipt of Teacher Corps peol)le and services. There is some concern on this committee as to whether or not. we should keep the Bureau of Indian Affairs in the school business. Some of us are developing rather serious doubts about whether we should not be making every step to convert this to public schools. Now you live on an Indian reservation and occupy a position with a tribal council and are also a member of a public school board of edu- cation. is that right? Mr. CLINE. Yes, sir. Mr. FORD. Do most of the people living on Indian reservations in Nebraska attend public schools or do they attend Bureau of Indian Affairs schools? Mr. CLINE. We have three Indian reservations in the State of Ne- braska but we have no bureau-operated schools in the State of Nebraska. Mr. FORD. When we were holding hearings on the west coast. it was pointed out that in the St.ate of Washington almost all Indian children attend public schools. Some of those public schools are in fact located on Indian reservations and the student. body is made up almost. entirely of the residents of the reservation but they are in fact public schools and they participate. in all of the rights, benefits, and disabilities of public school education to the same extent that all of the other children do. But in the State of Oregoii. which is imme- diately next to it. the reverse is true. There a.re a large nunTher of Indian children still going to Bureau of Indian Affairs schools. PAGENO="0469" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1291 There seems t.o be no explanation for why the public school system expands in one State to take them in and has not done very much about it m some other States. Mrs. GREEN. If the gentleman would yield. I think if he checked Oregon he would find our public schools in Oregon are for Indians and they have been for several years. Mr. Foiw. I am sorry Mr. Meeds is not here because he has made quite a study of the contrast between Washington and Oregon. I may be mixing up the two systems there, but there is no pattern apparently of regularity across the States. The question I really want to put to you is whether you feel on the basis of your experience in Nebraska where you now have all of the Indian children attending public schools that we ought to be expand- ing the programs in this and other legislation to encourage the Coil- tinuaiice of the separate segregated Bureau of Indian Affairs school system as distinguished from the public school system. Mr. CLINE. My own opinion is this, that the Bureau operated schools such as we have at Flandreau, S. Da.k., we have children com- ing from the State of Montana, North and South Dakota, Nebraska, and Iowa and Minnesota going to the boarding school at Flandreau. There is a reason as far as our different tribes are concerned and why we would like to see this school maintained. We have many children who become orphans and some become wayward and this is a place that will take these children and try to work out their problems and educate them. I think the Bureau intends within the coming years to turn these Bureau operated day schools over to school districts. I think one of the reasons they have not moved too swiftly toward that end is that we must consider the pepole living in these districts and the taxation upon their land and so forth. I know our Omaha people and Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska are the only two Indian tribes that I know of in the United States that pay taxes upon our trust~ lands. We are taxed just as any other cit i- zen of the State of Nebraska for our properties even though they are held in trust by the U.S. Government.. Mr. Foiw. I might say to you that if a Bureau of Indian Affairs intends to get out of the school business, they have not so testified before of this committee. The Secretary of the Interior came before this committee last year and asked to have these schools included in two very important titles of the Elementary and Secondary Educa- tion Act. At that time lie was asking for a 3-yea.r authorization and was t.alking in terms of the expansion of the programs within their schools. If he intends to get out. of the school system business. he~ has not told this committee that. yet. This leaves some of us with the problem of whether we want~ to encourage the continuance of a school system for Indians exclusively as a separate part of society for an indefinite period or whether we ought~ not to discourage the continuance of these and encourage the integration of Indian children into the regular school system and force the public schools to recognize their responsi- bility to accept them as full, first-class citizens. It is really a little bit difficult for some of us from the Midwest to understand how Members of Congress can get so incensed and exor- PAGENO="0470" 1292 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDITCATION AMENDMENTS cised about separate and equal facilities in the South but not feel any concern about continually voting here on this committee and also else- where for continuing sel)arate but theoretically equal facilities, and you smile when 1 say `~tlie.oi-etically," so I think you understand the underlining meaning of ~`separate. On the. one hand as a government we decry this as an antiquated doctrine that has no validity and yet liberally vote even on this com- mittee to continue such a doctrine. If we do not see such a need for continuing the program, it is not be- cause we are against anybody out there, but sooner or later we want to have then~ join the rest of tile 5(11001 system. Mr. B1~\DEM\S. Mr. Ayres? Mr. vin:s. ~\lr. Cline. how many members of the National Teacher Corps have you available. to your 275 to 300 children? Mr. CLIXE. Five. Mr. XYRES. Wh:it pait of the country did they come from? Were they primarily local people or did they come from some distances? Mr. (`niNE. No. sir; one came from California. I think one came from Massachusetts. one from South Dakota, and two from the city of Omaha. Mr. Ay~s. Do you know if they requested this particular assign- ment in working with your people? Mr. CMNE. Maybe they did request it but. I think that the appli- cants were screefle(l and we visited with them to see if these were the right people for our particular area. Mr. Xvurs. Mr. Cline. what is the total nlJml)er of your faculty ex- cluding the Teacher Corps personnel? Mr. C~~ixr. Thirteen. Mr. AYRES. That means you have 18 people available for the 2T5 to 300 children? Mr. CLINE. Yes, sir. Mr. Ayii':s. ,Just out of curiosity, what type of game did your boys take the teachers out to hunt Mr. (~LTNE. Once we went out deer hunting and I think the boy took him pheasant hunting. As I said, in the. statement I don't know who was teaching whom, whether the Teacher Corps was teaching my son how to shoot a gun or my son was pomting out. the pheasants to him. Mr. AYRE5. Thank you. Mr. BRAprM~~s. Where do the. interns go to college? Mr. (`LINE. At the Fniversitv of Omaha. Mr. BIL\DEM\s. Thank you very much for coming. Our committee is very glad to have with us this morning some representatives of the Women's Advertising Club of Washington and their friends the Go Girls from Shaw Junior High School. We want. to welcome all of you today and we hope you find your visit to our committee instructive. The Chair is not sure what witnesses are now in the room and wonders if our panel of Teacher Corps project directors are here, would they hold up their hands? I understand Miss Haskins and Miss Goodwin are also members of your panel. PAGENO="0471" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1293 STATEMENTS OF A PANEL OF MEMBERS OF THE NATIONAL TEACHER CORPS; DR. JOHN W. LETSON, STJPERINTENIYEI(T OF SCHOOLS, ATLANTA, GA.; MISS RHODA NEWMAN, PROJECT DI- RECTOR, UNIVERSITY OF ATLANTA; MRS. BARBARA GOODWIN, TEAM LEADER (MASTER TEACHER), BETHUNE SCHOOL, AT- LANTA, GA.; MISS DOROTHY HORNSBY, PRINCIPAL, BETHUNE SCHOOL, ATLANTA, GA., AND MISS THOMASINE HASKINS, TEACHER INTERN, COOK SCHOOL, ATLANTA, GA. Dr. LETSON. Miss Haskins is one of the members of the Teacher Corps in Atlanta. Dr. Newman is from the University of Georgia and is involved in the training of our Teacher Corps proglamn. Mr. BRADEMAS. Just take your seat, sir, and move around the table and identify your witnesses and then proceed in any way you see fit. Dr. LETSOX. Thomasine Haskins to my ri~'ht is a member of the Teache.r Corps who has been in the (it of Atlanta this year. She is from Virginia and was an elected representative of her group to come if she had an opportunity. 1)r. Roda Newman on my left is from the University of Georgia, the director of the Teacher Corps training program, in cooperation with time Atlanta school system. Miss Dorothy Hornsby is the principal of an elementary school in Atlanta where a team of corps workers has been assigned this year. Mrs. Barbara Goodwin is one of the experienced lay teachers selected from the Atlanta school system and has served this year in directing and helping to direct the activities of the Teacher Corps. Mr. Brademas, we each have a prepared statement, and I have turned in my statement which I certainly do not intend to read. I wish to make a few general statements and comments and then ask the members of this panel to make a statement which they too have presented in written form. We do not have a written statement from Miss Haskins who is a member of the group but she is here for the pur- pose of answering questions if the committee would like to address them to her. I would like to begin by merely saying that in school systems throughout this country and particularly in large cities like Atlanta we have a concentration of young people coming into our schools with very serious problems. They are from culturally deprived backgrounds, they need many things in terms of bringing them up to date and bringing them up to a point of readiness for real learning. There have been many things made available by the Congress in recent years, recent months that have proven extremely valuable in helping to meet some of these needs. Certainly, the whole program, the Elementary and Secondary Edu- cation Act, particularly, has been very helpful and Atlanta in common with other communities throughout this Nation has derived a tre- mendous benefit from the resources that have been made available in this manner. We started in Atlanta early with the planning of a program for the Teacher Corps, recognizing that it offered an opportunity for us PAGENO="0472" 1294 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTCATION AMENDMENTS to accomplish some of the goals that we did not see any other way of accomplishing in our school systems. We proceeded with a rather large plan for the Teacher Corps pro- grain but after its funding we found that it was necessary to reduce it somewhat. So our emphasis during this year has been with a series of teams that are working in our kindergarten program. We started here because of a full realization that if we are to put into effect and set in motion those things that will bring about some correction in terms of culturally deprived children coming into our schools, we believe that the most effective place to start is in the pre- school, certainly the primary years. We had some other areas that we were hoping to implement but did not do so because of the unavailability of resources with which it could be accomplished. It has been true in school systems throughout the Nation that for some strange reason there has developed a feeling on the part of many teachers that to be assigned to a school in a culturally deprived area or neighborhood is somewhat an indication of a lack of approval by the school system or that there is something somewhat less than socially desirable. As a result, if teachers in many instances are given a choice they would prefer the other schools in the other kinds of neighborhoods in our community. This is understandable because in many respects we have made the teaching job in these culturally deprived neighborhoods a very difficult one. `We have assumed in general that we could maintain somewhat the same pupil-teacher ratio, and in most instances, our more overcrowded schools, seriously crowded schools are located in these areas. There may be an explanation for it but I think certainly at this moment it would take a rather long discussion to arrive at that ex- planation but I think it is sufficient here to say it is probably true that we have made the teaching job almost impossible in some of these communities in a situation where we need more resources and must have more resources if we are to provide an effective educational program. `We saw the Teacher Corps as one of those opportunities and we be- lieve that it has proven its worth in our situation in helping to ac- complish this purpose. I think as you hear some of the discussion on the part of the other members of this team that they can give some of the specific details in terms of how it. has operated and what it has really meant to the young people in our schools. I would not want to close this brief review without saying that certainly there have been problems in rela- tion to this. I think most of the problems that we have faced have been the direct result of uncertainty and indefinitness. We have had some misgivings on the part of the corpsmen at the beginning as to financing and whether it would be continued or not continued. There have been some problems that. have been the direct result of timing because the resources we.re not. made available at a time or on a time schedule that permitted in many instance.s the kind of ureparat ion that would have been desirable. We do not. feel that t.his is a. fault of the program itself. It is one that is certainly within the reason to correct. The individuals who PAGENO="0473" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTJCATION AMENDMENTS 1295 have been assigned to the Teachers Corps in Atlanta have in the main 1)erformed well. Now not all of them have clone so. We have not had, however, any reason or any problem as far as the local school system is concerned about bringing about a decision and in taking whatever remedial action was necessary in many of the cases involved As I look to the future, recognizing that if we are truly going to edu- cate all of the children of all of the people, it cannot be accomplished by business as usual. It is going to take some new approaches, it is going to take some more effective approaches than we have made in the past and certainly the efforts that I mentioned in terms of title I and other resources have been helpful but I think that it is appropriate that we urge the continuation of any program that offers a hope for the local school systems throughout this country to do the kind of job that we feel must be done. Mr. Chairman, if it is appropriate, I would like to call on the other members of the panel to make a statement in terms of their written statement or oral statement if they prefer. Dr. Newman. Mr. BRADEMAS. I might suggest to you and your colleagues that you niight try to summarize your statements in order to give all of you an opportunity to be heard and to give the members of the committee a chance to ask you questions. Dr. NEWMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will be happy to sum- marize mine if I may and then to call your particular attention to some of the statement that we have written before us. In general, the University of Georgia has last summer attempted to orient 27 teacher interns into working with the disadvantaged, train them particularly to work in Atlanta's disadvantage.d poverty areas schools. These were taught by regular faculty members of the University of Georgia, by five Atlanta experienced teachers who were carefully selected and highly qualified, who were given the rank of instructor at the University of Georgia during the summer session, and by visit- ing lecturers and consultants. These 27 interns w-ho came to the University of Georgia presented a wide background of interests and of preparation. We had about half who were Negro and half who w-ere white. Our experienced lay teachers-three were Negro and two were white. All of us, faculty and staff, lived in a self-contained facility there on the campus of the. University of Georgia. Then we came to Atlanta for the last part of the summer session and lived and worked in time poverty sections of Atlanta. During the summer these teacher interns earned 16 quarter hours of graduate credit. Now looking at the specific statements brought~ about by the prob- lems that we might have had, I think this is anpropriate at this time. Traditionally those, who have endeavored to help the poor have en- countered many difficulties. The problems faced by the 27 teacher interns who reported to the University of Georgia were brought about by time pressure of time upon the United States Office of Education in selecting Teacher Corps imiterns for the first year's operation. This PAGENO="0474" 1296 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS time pressure was clue to the fact that the Congress did not pass an appropriation for the implementation of the Teacher Corps early enough to permit the Office of Education to engage in deliberate imple- me.iitation. The plans for the Teacher Corps were well formulated by the Office of Education, cooperating school systems, and the universities in- volvc.cl, hut a period of several months was needed to implement these plans adequately. If the Congress will provide funds for the con- tinuance and further development of the Teacher Corps, a first rate program can be developed by the Office of Education, cooperating school systems, and the universities involved. The major problems encountered in this first year of operation should not be construed as being a measure of the soundness of the National Teacher Corps pro- grain. These were the major problems: 1. Lack of time for adequate communication with Teacher Corps applicants resulted in inadequate information regarding background and personal readiness for participation in such a program. 2. Insufficient time to process applications for Teacher Corps ap- plicants for full admission to the graduate schools resulted in inappro- priate actions. 3. Insufficient time to work out with institutions, school systems, and individual Teacher Corps interns the necessary financial arrangements resulted in confusion. The factors I have just mentioned resulted in insecurity on the part of many of the Teacher Corps interns who were selected to participate in the program. Without question many were assigned who should not have been selected for participation. The result was a high drop out rate. In spite of these handicaps it is believed that some progress has been made toward the objectives of the Early Childhood Teacher Training Center. All five experienced teachers are leading teams in schools in low income areas. Twenty-one of the original twenty-seven teacher interns satisfactorily completed the Preservice Institute and were recommended at the end of the summer to the Atlanta public school system for the 2-year work study inservice program. Of the 15 teacher interns still in the program six are Negro. Of the 15. nine have been admitted to graduate school and hope to earn the master's degree in early childhood education in June 1968. The six who are not qualified to enter the graduate school hope to have earned profe~sional teaching certificates before September 1967. All of the 15 plan to continue working with the disadvantaged child either in or out. of the school setting. In a very effective way, day by day, experienced teachers are leading their teams in reaching and teaching the children ~` poverty. The T.Jniversity of Georgia would like to bring two recommenda- tions: 1. It. is recommended that sufficient funds then be provided to per- mit. the presently enrolled qualified teacher-interns to complete the master's degree and to permit. those interns currently working toward professional certificates in early childhood education to attain their ob- j ectives. PAGENO="0475" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1297 `2. It is recommended that~ early funding be provided for the pur- pose of continuing the National Teacher Corps, so that well-formu- lated guidelines niay be effectively and deliberately followed in at- tracting and training teachers who can strengthen the educational opportimit.ie.s available to children in areas having concentrations of low-income families. Early authorization and adequate funding are prerequisites for success. The University of Georgia appreciates this opportunity to speak on behalf of the National Teacher Corps. Mr. BRADEMAS. Thank you very much. Dr. LETSON. Mr. Chairman, I am assuming you would like the paraphrasing of the written statement? Mr. BRADEMAS. Yes, please. We do not have as much time as we would like to have and we have other witnesses. (The document referred to follows:) TESTIMONY BY DR. RHODA SPRUCE NEWMAN, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR AND DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL TEACHER CORPS CENTER, UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA, ATHENS, GA. The National Teacher Corps is theoretically sound, but it is a difficult concept to translate into action. The University of Georgia has established an Early Childhood Teacher Train- ing Center of the National Teacher Corps in a cooperative arrangement with the Atlanta Public School System and the United States Office of Education. P'ur- poses of the Early Childhood Teacher Training Center are the same as those set forth in Section 511, Part B, Title 17, in the Higher Education Act of 1965: "~ * * to strengthen the education opportunities available to children in areas having concentrations of low-income families and to encourage colleges and universities to broaden their programs of teacher preparation by- 1) attracting and training qualified teachers who will be made available to local educational agencies for teaching in such areas: and (2) attracting and training inexperienced teacher-interns who will be made available for teaching and inservice training to local educational agencies in si,nli areas in teams led by an experienced teacher." During the summer session of 1966 the University of Georgia held a Pre- service Institute for the purpose of orienting teacher-interns into kindergarten teaching in schools in low-income areas of Atlanta. Teacher-interns wire guided and taught by regular faculty members (two white and three Negro't. by five carefully selected, highly qualified experienced teachers from the Atlanta Public School System who held time rank of instructor, and by visiting professors, lecturers, and consultants. At the close of the Prcservice Institute teacher-interns under the supervision of experienced teachers and members of the University faculty began work in the Atlanta Schools with regularly organized groups of children from low-income families and will continue to work with them throughout two actulemnic years. Accordingly, the progra lit provides qua] i fled grad mm ate students a twenty-four month period of continuous study and work in early childhood education which meets the requirements of the Master's degree and the fifth-year certificate in this area. The 27 teacher-interns who reported to the Preservice Tnstitute brought a wide range of interests and various backgrounds of preparation. Six men and 21 women comprised the group w-hich was about one-half white and one-half Negro. All except three were in their twenties and most were single. Less than one-third had majored in elementary education. None had majored in early childhood education. For five weeks during the first session of summer school experienced teachers, teacher-interns, and University faculty lived, studied, and carried on the Preservice Institute within one building on campus. During the second session the Preser'vice Institute moved to Atlanta where each teacher-intern arranged for his own housing. Headquarters for the Institute were provided by the Atlanta Public School System. Throughout the Preservice Institute actual laboratories for observation and participation were poverty area schools and neighborhood. The procedure used PAGENO="0476" 129S ELEMENTAllY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS was work-study-seminar in which theory was distilled from practice and profes- ~ional skill refined from continuous assessment. During the first summer ses- sion teacher-interns observed young children from affluent, privileged urban and rural backgrounds as well as young children from deprived, underprivileged urban and rural backgrounds. During the second summer session teacher-interns worked each morning as an aide in Head Start classrooms in Atlanta. thus gaining 40 contact hours of direct exposure to children in poverty. During the summer teacher-interans were enrolled in four academic courses for 16 quarter hours credit. A ten-hour workshop in educational planning and development for the disadvantaged was designed to develop within each intern an understanding of deprivation in its many forms and professional skflls to offset impoverishment. Regular faculty and experienced teachers cooperatively planned broad areas of content and structured the workshop to include a study of the physical, emotional, social, and intellectual nature of the young child; the relationship between early environmental conditions and child development: causes and effects of poverty and the influence of the forms and intensity of deprivation on young children; language and concept development: organiza- tional structure of the kindergarten; development and use of different materials appropi4ate for kindergarten; and the historical and cultural heritage of the Negro w-ith implications for enhancing the self-concept of young Negro children from limited environments. A five-hour course in urban sociology was designed to use the problems and resources of Atlanta as a laboratory. Two objectives of this course were to develop the competence of teacher-interns in comprehending many factors in community organization which result in various forms of deprivation and to work positively toward remediation of its effects. Teacher-interns and experi- enced teachers devoted 30 contact hours to visiting various community facilities and service organizations. During this phase of the Preservice Institute each teacher-intern worked with young children in deprived neighborhoods. The one-hour research and evaluation seminar provided teacher-interns with knowledge of the well-documented disparity between capacity and achievement of children from low-income areas. and introduced teacher-interns to skills in experimental research. Traditionally those who have endeavored to help the poor have encountered many difficulties. The problems faced by the 27 teacher-interns who reported to the Preservice Institute at the University of Georgia were brought about by the pressure of time upon the United States Office of Education in selecting Teacher Corps interns for the first year's operation. This time pressure was due to the fact that the Congress did not pass an appropriation for the implementation of the Teacher Corps early enough to permit the Office of Education to engage in deliberate implementation. The plans for the Teacher Corps were well formu- lated by the Office of Education, cooperating school systems. and the universities involved. but a period of several months was needed to implement these plans adequately. If the Congress w-ill provide funds for the continuance and further development of the Teacher Corps, a first-rate program caii be developed by the Office of Education, cooperating school systems, and the universities involved. The major problems encountered in this first year of operation should not be construed as being a measure of the soundness of tile National Teacher Corps program. These were tile major problems: 1. Lack of time for adequate communication with Teacher Corps applicants resulted in inadequate information regarding background and personal readiness for participation in such a program. 2. Insufficient time to process applications of Teacher Corps applicants for full admission to the Graduate Schools resulted in inappropriate actions. 3. Insufficient time to work out with institutions, school systems, and individ- ual Teacher Corps interns the necessary financial arrangements resulted in confusion. The factors mentioned on the preceding page resulted in insecurity on the part of many of the Teacher Corps Interns who were selected to participate in the progr~1m. Without question many were assigned who should not have been selected for participation. The result was a high drop-out rate. In spite of these handicaps it is believed that some progress has been made toward the objectives of the Early Childhood Teacher Training Center. All five PAGENO="0477" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDtTCATION AMENDMENTS 1299 experienced teachers are leading teams in schools in low-income areas. Twenty- one of the original 27 teacher interns satisfactorily completed the Preservice institute and were recommended at the end of the summer to the Atlanta Public School System for the two-year work-study Inservice program. Of the 15 teacher-interns still in the program, 6 are Negro. Of the 15, 9 have been admitted to Graduate School and hope to earn the Master's Degree in Early Childhood Education in June, 1968. The six who are not qualified to enter the Graduate School hope to have earned professional teaching certificates before September, 1967. All of thc 15 plan to continue working with the disadvantaged child either in or out of the school setting. In a very effective way, day by day, experienced teachers are leading their teams in reaching and teaching the children in poverty. The University of Georgia brings two recommendations: 1. It is recommended that sufficient funds be provided to permit the presently enrolled qualified teacher-interns to complete the Master's Degree and to per- mit those interns currently working toward professional certificates in Early Childhood Education to attain their objectives. 2. It is recommended that early funding be provided for the purpose of con- tinuing the National Teacher Corps, so that well-formulated guidelines may be effectively and deliberately followed in attracting and training teachers who can strengthen the educational opportunities available to children in areas having concentrations of low-income families. Early authorization and adequate funding are prerequisites for success. The University of Georgia appreciates this opportunity to speak on behalf of the National Teacher Corps. Miss HORNSBY. Mr. Chairman, it has long been a matter of principle and concern to the faculty of the Mary McLeod Bethune Elementary School that the children who entered the kiiidergarten have been de- prived of many of the cultural advantages of the. average 4- or 5-year- old child and have not brought with them those experiences of readiness deemed necessary in a. form-learning situation. rç~~ children come from disadvantaged families in a low socio-. economic neighborbood. Being deeply concerned about. these prob- lems, the faculty welcomes any group or program that would assist in enriching the kindergarten program. At the beginning of the year we. were assigned a team of five and a lead teacher. As I said before, we. were very happy because we were happy to do something in order to improve them so that they would be ready for formal education. It has been very fortunate. that the team has operated quite success- fully in the school. I am interested in them from the standpoint of what has been clone for the teachers in the school, what has been done for the pupils, and mainly, what has been done for the community. At Bethune they have welcomed the team. Being concerned about the teacher-pupil ratio, having the team there has reduced the ratio very low, in fact 8 to 1. This gives our children the opportunity of receiving better education. Therefore the faculty is very happy he.- cause even those in the upper grades feel that if the chii(lren get this low ratio at the beginning it will help them even u-lien they get up hii~her. then, too, it has had a. great impact upon the teachers themselves because they have grown. They have had many experiences and they are very happy over t.he progress. The comm~mit.y has really received help. First of all, the. parents have had an opportunit.y. The team realizes that. any effective pro- gram must involve the parents as well as the children and make a eon- tiibution to the community. One of their first. tasks was to become PAGENO="0478" 1300 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS well acquainted with the home environment of each child and to analyze the ~uiTounuing neighborhood. Routine visits a~e made to tile l~omes and parents are invited to observe tlìe children and to participate in their many learning activi- tIes. In I ike. manner the parents are proud of the fact that team mem- bers visited the homes during the prepianning week in order to get acquainted with them. One mother remarked to the principal "She must. be a good teacher. She caine in and sat clown in my house and invited me to come~ and see my son in the classroom." Further. p~ients are frequently invited to meetings at the school for the I)tirpose of gaining new insights into the ways of helping their children at home. Suggestions are given, health rules and the importance of family unity, and another evidence of involvement of parents is that they accompany the children on the trips to help the teacher and this is good in that the ~)aI~ents are learning along with the children and can understand more fully what the school is trying to do. It is signifi- cant that the teachers have learned to converse with parents who have limited cultural backgrounds to the extent that the parents feel at ease and friendly around them. The parents take. pride in witnessing programs presented by their children. A little welcome address or a goodbye song thrills the heart of every parent. The Na.sh-WTasliincjon area Office of Economic Opportunity in At- lanta, Inc., was a great help to the team during registration week. The oflice furnished the team with the names and addresses of families with children of kindergarten age. This saved much time and effort in locating pupils to be enrolled on time. This helped to increase the enrollment, more than 10 percent over the previous year. The EOX workers also assist in securing clothing for children who need it. and constantly inform the teachers of needs of those children enrolled in the program. One of the greatest problems that. has been faced in the initiation of the National Teacher Corps program has been the unavailability of funds from the proposed budget because of the late appropriation; therefore, I recommend that the funds be allotted sufficiently early in order that the full program may be carried out. Too often members of the staff, or the school, have had to use their personal resources to finance activities such as trips. In conclusion, as a principal of a school in which a Teacher Corps program operates, I wish to stress that the National Teacher Corps has had a tremendous impact upon the professional growth of the teaching team and faculty in general and the cultural growth of both the kindergarten children and their parents. It is my sincere hope that. this program will not only be continued but will be greatly expanded in the future. Thank von very much. (The document referred to follows :) TEsTIvoNY flY DOROThY ELIZABETh IIoRNsRY. PRINCIPAL MARY MCLEOD BETHUNE ELEMENTARY Scnoor.. ATLANTA PUBLIC SCHOOLS. ATLANTA GA. It has long been a matter of great concern to the principal and faculty of the Mary McLeod Bethi.me Elementary SThoal that the children who entered the kindergarten have been deprived of many of the cultural advantages of the aver- PAGENO="0479" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDAEY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1301 age four or live-year old child and have nt 1)rougllt with theni fbi se exi)eriences of readiness deemed necessary in a formal learnina situation. The children come from disadvantaged families in a low socio-ecnnomic neighborhood. Being ileci ily (`I llcei'iie(l about thee iroh1uIii~. tie fa ui ty Welci me~ any an up or pro- grain that wi 1111(1 assist in curl `hing the ki lilerga it en pr grain. At the beginning of the 1PGG-GT school term, tlìe National Teacher Corps Program in I lie area if Ni ndergart en F I un non ~vn s jut i' ~ mi ~ the deprived areas in Atlanta by offering internships through the Atlanta Public School,s to college graduates interested in working ~vit1i culturally ileprived children. Betliune School was fortunate in receiving a teaiii. A study of tlii program re- veals sonic interesting facts concernina 11w impact the program has had on the tea ni. the kindergarten pupils, the faculty, the ttal s'iiool program, the parents and on the community. The original team consisted of an experienced teacher from the Atlanta Public Schools and five interns from six states California, l)elaware. Florida, Georgia, Virginia. antI \Vashingt oh. One of the interns imiarried during the Cliristma~ Holidays and moved to another city. The team and the three regular teachers conipiete the kindergarten staff. The interns are all young and seem to pos- sess most of the character traits which are desil'oble and lleeessmtry for working together in a culturally disadvantaged comlnunut y. It is apparent that they not only have an abiding love for children, but thy enjoy and respect each other. One evidence of tills is seen in the fact that they have organized themselves into a choral group which performs occasionally en formal programs such as the Parent-Teacher Association and other fui (`ulty progra n's. They work together under the efficient iea(~ershmp of their experienced teacher. It is appa rent that they have grown trenmeiidously in the ability to l)erform their routine duties as classroom teachers as well as cam'rv the additional professional s('hedule outlined for all interns by the University of Georgia. Much of the success of the l)rograln has been due to the dedicated service given by the experieil('ed teacher. She has grown trenien(louslv in her ability to lead the team and takes a personal interest iii each nieniber. supervioes each closely, and effectively (`ounsel s each concern lug 1e'rsonal and professional problems. The impact of the prograni on tile pupils has been significant. There is no doubt in the mind of any person observing the program that the pupils are re- cepients of love, guidance and understanding froni the team and all others who work with the program. The program operates on two three-hour sessions in two classrooms. Each room has a morning and an afternoon session. Tile total kindergarten enroll- nient is 123. The pupil-teacher ratio has been reduce(l from approximately thirty- live to one to a ratio of eight pupils to one teacher. The reduced ratio permits each pupil to receive a greater amnouiit of individual attention. Pupils are exposed to many cultural experiences. An evening spent at the Tiny Tots Concert, which was given by the Atlanta Symphony Orchestra, was an enriching experienc~ for the kindergarten children. A visit to the theatre to see a fine ballet thrilled them. A Saturday afternoon matinee at the ice show, fol- lowed by a luncheon at a nearby restaurant, fascinated all of them. A trip to the Post Office to mail valentine cards to their mothers. quiet browsing in the main library of the city, and a morning watching the operation of a nearby laundromat. are all experiences w-hich have greatly incieased the insights of the iiupils iiito the world around them. All of these experis nces have been enjoyed because of the National Teacher Corps Program. The members of the faculty have a renewed interest in teaching as they observe the kindergarten children. They are looking forward to receivilir children whom they believe w-ill be more ready for formal education than any pupils we ever had at the first grade level. The first grade teachers, however, are having misgivings over the fact that they might not lie aide to accomplish nearly mis niuch because of the greater teacher- pupil ratio in the first grade. It is also aniazing to notice the enthusiasm show-mi not only by the members of the team but by tile regular kindergarten teachers. There is a god relationship between the team niembers and the other faculty nieniiwrs : in fact, no difference is shown. Mem,1.ers of the team participate in meetings, make clerical rePorts, a ml participate iii any other activity. rFi,e\. have all lea rued to love the school, feel close to their co-w-orkers and cooperate with the other faculty members in advancing the total school program for the good of the `imihlren. The beautiful PAGENO="0480" 1302 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS bulletin boards for the month of March were done by the team and their pupils. M~uiy of the smiles seen in the halls are those of team nienibers. and much credit that has come to the school has been because of accomplishments made by them. `~urely the program has affected every member of the staff. WHY? It is obvious that the children hate progressed miraculously. We are all watching them giow. A smile from a little boy who has been made to feel that he is au important person in the world. a complete sentence from a little girl who refused to have anything to say when school opened. and a group of children standing erect with their heads to the sky saying the pledge to the flag-all of these indi- cate that. the National Teacher Corps is doing much for this community. The team realizes that any effective program must involve the parents as well as the children and make a contribution to the community. One of their first tasks was to become well acquainted with the home environment of each child and to analyze the surrounding neighborhood. Routine visits are made to the homes, and parents are invited to observe their children and to participate in their many learning experiences. In like manner. the parents are proud of the fact that team members visited the homes during the pre-planning week in order to get acquainted with them. One niother remarked to the principal, "She must be a i~ood teacher. She came in and sat down in niy house and invited me to come to see my son in the classroom." Further, parents are frequently invited to meet- ings at the school for the purpose of gaining new- insights into ways of helping their children at home. Suggestions are given about buying books for children, health rules, and importance of family unity. Another evidence of involvement of parents is that they accompany the children on trips to help the teacher. This is good in that the parents also are learning along with the children and can understand more fully what the school is trying to do for their children. It is significant that the teachers have learned to converse with parents who have himuuite(l cultural backgrounds to the extent that the parents feel at ease and friendly around them. The parents take pride in witnessing programs presented by their children. A little welcome address or a good-bye song thrills the heart of every parent. The NASH-WASHINGTON area office of Economic Opportunity Atlanta, Inc. was a great help to the team during registration week. The office furnished the team w-ith the names and addresses of families with children of kindergarten are. This saved much time and effort in locating pupils to be enrolled on time. This helped to increase the enrollment more than ten percent over the previous year. The E.O.A. workers also assist in securing clothing for children who need it and constantly inform the teachers of needs of those children enrolled in the ~)rOgram. RECOMMENDATION S One of the greatest problems that has been faced in the initiation of the National Teacher Corps Program has been the unavailability of funds from the proposed budget because of the late appropriation: therefore, I recommend that time funds be allotted sufficiently early in order that the full program may be carried out. Too often members of the staff, or the school, have had to use their l)eIsOIial resources to finance activities, such as trips. In conclusion, as a principal of a school in which a Teacher Corps program operates, I wish to stress that the National Teacher CorJ)s has had a tremendous impact upon the professional growth of the teaching team and faculty in general alm(l the cultural growth of both the kindergarten children and their parents. It is my sincere hope that this program will not only be continued but will he greatly expanded in the future. Dr. LETSON. Mr. Chairman, this is Mrs. Barbara Goodwin, presi- dent of the DCEI State program in the State of Georgia and also an experienced teacher in Georgia with one of these teams. Mrs. GooDwiN. I would like to state this report represents the views and thinking of all of the five lady teachers. We have had many opportunities to meet together and have tried to make the program more or less uniform over the city adjusting it to the needs of each iii div idu a I school where we were working. The purpose of the National Teacher Corps involves strengthening the educational opportunities for the disadvantaged and also emph~i- PAGENO="0481" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTXATIOX AMENDMENTS 1303 sizes the training of teachers. These are the two aspects with which I have been close]y connected. Our teams each had a male intern, and a male teacher in kinder- garten is an unusual thing. These men have adjusted beautifully to the kindergarten program and have made a real contribution. We have a carpenter shop in one school. In another school a young man has constructed a puppet stage and is working in the field of language arts and we have found this very effective in getting the shy child to talk. In another school audiovisual equipment is being used plus other materials supplied by one of the book companies to work in the field of language development where these children are often seriously lacking. I mention the work of the male interns in pa1~icular because it is unusual to have a male in the kindergarten. The children of course are delighted, often call them daddy and they have been especially beneficial to those who do not have a father image in the home. Have you ever heard a 5-year-old boy say to you, `~I can talk." Recently while being given a language test one small boy said this to one of our experienced teachers as he spoke in sentences for the first time in the fall. Have you ever seen a little girl 5 years old afraid to walk uphill be- cause she never had before? Have you ever watched the happy smile on her face when she discovered that her feet would take her uphill so she could gather nuts and leaves like the other children? Trips of interest to the community are commonplace to your chil- dren and mine and a part of the hidden curriculum with which they enter school. Thus enabling them to understand school language and learn to read in contrast, it is not uncommon for children in urban slums to grow up without having been more than a dozen blocks from their homes. Xlthough one teacher with a class of 30 or 40 kindergarten children twice a day, cannot take trips, the interns in our classes have enabled the regular teachers to make many trips with the children. The preparation for these trips and the classroom activities which follow insure that proper learning takes place. In this way they become a part of the rich experience and back- ground essential to a good kindergarten program and provide the children with some of the understanding that they must bring to the printed page if they are to learn to read well. Children who enter kindergarten after having been in Headstart classes need to continue their education in classes with a low teacher- pupil ratio if the benefits of that program are not to be lost. In such classes physical defects and serious emotional problems can be spotted and treated early. A year of internship for teachers allows time for them to become acquainted with the many services and highly trained experts who are available in the school system and the community to help them do a better job for children. There is also time to learn how to operate and use effectively the many audiovisual aids now available to our schools. Every good program can be improved and to this end we offer the following rec- ommendations: 15-492-61-pt. 2-31 PAGENO="0482" 1301- ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS Early and complete funding for 2-year programs such as this one in order to avoid (lisappoultlnent. frustration, and hardship for the interns and to provide tune for adequate planning. Two. mote care in the eening of interns with sufficient time for the institute ot Ii i211er learning and the local education agency to review tr~u1script before final selection. Three. better communication with prospective interns, particularly with regard to the following : First, specifically, orientation to such pio~~'an~as the one iii Atlanta which offered experience only in the kindergartemi anti a degree prog~'~~m only in early childhood education. ~econtiTv. more communication with regard to requirements for ad- mission to graduate school with certification requirements with mdi- Vi(Tual State boards of education. We strongly urge that the second year of this program be funded so that the young people who came in good faith will be able to complete their studies. Tbank von. Mr. BRADEMAS. Thank you very much. Dr. LETSOX. Mr. Braclemas. I would like to ask Miss Thomasine lla~kins if she would like to tell a little about herself. Miss I KTXS. I am from Tflchmond, Va., and I did my under- graduate at Petersbur~i, Va. I was a sociology major. I was not in education. This is a challenge to me because I know I have to work harder in teaehii~ l)ecause I have to eain some of the skills that those who were already in education already had. I have always laid a sincere desire to work with people, especially with children, and the National Teacher Corps gave me an oppor- tunity to do these two things, to do a service to people and to work with children. I am open to any questions you might have. Mr. BBADENL\S. Thank you very much. Thank you. Dr. Letson. and all of you for this most impressive set of statements about the Teacher Corps. I must say I am struck by several conclusions and I will set them forth and then ask you a couple of questions before yielding to my colleagues. (The document referred to follows:) TESTIMONY BY DR. JoHN W. LETSON. SUPERINTENDENT, ATLANTA Puiir~c SCHOOLS, ATLANTA, GA. The following comments concerning the National Teacher Corps Program, which is currently operating in the Atlanta Public School System, are in rela- tion to (1) the purpose of the Corps as set forth in the Higher Education Act of 100.5 and (2) the operational experience of the School System and the Uni- versity of Georgia. the institution of higher education which is assisting with the training of the corpsmen. Care will be exercised in order to comment fairly concerning the intent of the Act, in spite of the many operational problems which have consumed an amount of time disproportionate to the size of the progra 111. The main purposes of tlie National Teacher Corps have significant educational implications. They focus attention on (1) the need to strengthen the educational opportnities available to children in areas having concentration of low-income families and (2) the need to encourage colleges and universities to broaden their programs of teacher preparation. The attainment of these purposes involves the development of a partnership composed of the local educational agencies and the institutions of higher education. The use of experienced and inexperienced PAGENO="0483" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1305 teachers, as provided for in the Act. is the liakon between the pupil who comes from an area having high concentration of low-income faiiiilies and the college professor who has traditionally been charged with the responsibility of pre- paring teachers. The experienced teachers supplement both the instructional program of the local educational agency and the professional program for preparing teachers of I he histitution of higher education. The inexperienced teachers, or the interns. bring special interests and diverse hackgrounds based on nation-wide experiences. The process of developing a team composed of experienced teachers and interns brings the local educational agency and the institution of higher education into a partnership which charts a new approach to the preparation of teachers and to the improvement of instruction. The design of the National Teacher Corps Program in Atlanta incorporates the operation of the program into the mastor plau fur improving the educational opportunities for boys and girls in Atlanta. This design prevents fragmentation of programs, Prolaotf\s attainment of unity of effort, and maximizes the benefits derived from prograni~ which are financed from various sources. The overall objectives of the master plan is the improvement of the training of teachers and is based on the assumption that the greatest and most enduring benefits become available to pupils w-hen the eompeteneies of teachers are improved. The development of the National Teacher Corps Program in Atlaata involved representatives of the local staff and the University of Georgia. Principals, teachers, and system-wi ile instructional a nd ad~o mi strative personnel. a fter oval- uating existing efforts to develop an instructional program to lesseii educational deprivation, designed the National Teacher Corps Prograiii to promote the serv- ices in the kindergarten area. This decision is appropriate for the longitudinal program w-hich supplements the services provided for by tho }Iead Start and pre- kindergarten programs financed by the Office of Economic Opportunity and Title I, Elementary and Secondary Education Act, respectively. Further. the Corps program in the kindergarten serves as a foundation for the main thrust of the Title I program : improving the communicative and linguistic skills of pupils in grades one through three by improving the skills of teachers in the teaching of reading and by providing for them supportive services such as counseling, social work, psychological, and clerical. The University of Georgia was selected as the cooperating institution of higher education because of its close cooperation with the Atlanta Public School System and because it is the nearest institution to Atlanta that has a program to prepare kindergarten teachers. The desire of the officials of the University to develop further the partnership between the Univer- sity and the Atlanta School System is evidenced by the fact that two members of the faculty have been placed on a full-time basis in the Institutional Division of the System. These and other faculty members have worked diligently to develop and provide the pre-sen-iee and in-service preparation needed by the interns. Implementation of a new program and the incorporation of it into the operation of a school system are difficult and time-consuming tasks. The difficulty and time increase as the number of agencies increase. In the ease of the National Teacher Corps Program four agencies are involved: the Atlanta Public School System, the University of Georgia, the U.S. Office of Education, and the Congress. The offi- cials of the U.S. Office of Education are to he commended for the manner in which the program has been administered. They involved representatives of the School System and the University while formulating plans to mount the program. These Idans included recruiting. screening, aml selection procedures of interns and experienced teachers and their admission to the University and employment by the School System. The responsibilities of each agency w-ere carefully delin- eated to the satisfaction of each party. Realistic and sufficient time intervals to accomplish each procedural step for implementing the program were determined according to the requirement of each organization. However, the appropriation of funds by Congress at extremely hate dates for both the pre-service and the in-servico progralii has tremendously hampered and comnphica ted im hdementatiou and operation. The late appropi'iation also caused anxieties on time part of the corpsicuu w-bich co~lcl have been disastrous had not the U.S. Office of Education, the Umii\-ersity of Georgia, and the Atlanta Public School System w-orked dili- gently to counteract thomu. It is believed that most of the prol)hems encountered havo stanimed fr iii the failure of Congress to finance the ~)rogrmma in sufficient rime to permuit whol esomo puidi ( relations. com manuica tion. niovemnout of people, and accomph shiacut of organizational pro(esses. The structure of a National Teacher Corps program has two significant fea- tures : personnel and program. The Atlanta program was designed to recauit PAGENO="0484" 1306 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS five experienced teachers from among the Atlanta kindergarten teachers whos& performance in the classroom had exhibited proficiency in instructional proce- dures; in relationships with other professional personnel, pupils, and parents; and in professional growth and development. Five highly qualified teachers were identified and are serving as experienced teachers. The program was designed to recruit from throughout the Nation thirty interns or inexperienced teachers. The U.S. Office of Education during the limited time between funding and the pre-service program was able to recruit only 27 interns; and this nuni- ber is now 15 because of various reasons. One of the interns was not recom- mended by the staff of the University and the experienced teachers to continue in the program at the end of the pre-service period; others have terminated their relationships with the Corps because of reasons such as indefiniteness of funds, marriage, maternity, personal reasons, assignments to other teaching positions in the Atlanta School System because of the desire to teach in areas other than kindergarten, and general lack of interest in pursuing a teaching career. The program was designed for the pre-service program to be conducted during this past summer with the first six-week period on the campus of the University and the last three weeks in Atlanta. The in-service program was designed to begin in mid-August when regular faculty members of the School System reported for duty. The experienced teachers assisted the faculty of the University in teach- ing the interns while they were on the campus of the University and in Atlanta during the pre-service period. The experienced teachers have assumed leader- ship in the various activities of the interns during the in-service period, includ- ing classroom duties, community and home visitations, and seminar discussions. The interns serve in seven schools and work as members of five team, each team under the leadership of an experienced teacher. The pre-service period proved to be very beneficial and represented an innova- tive approach in teacher preparation. About a third of the interns had taken a few professional education courses during their undergraduate years. Many had not decided on their careers and had pursued a liberal arts undergraduate program. Only one had previously entertained a career as a kindergarten teacher. Most of them were not familiar with communities which have high concen- trations of low-income families. Hence, during the pre-service period, the faculty of the University. with the assistance of the experienced teachers, endeavored to familiarize the interns with teaching as a career, behavioral traits of kinder- garten pupils, communities of low-income families, community resources avail- able to help with personal and educational problems, and policies and regulations of the Atlanta Public School System. The interns thus had opportunities to know themselves better, their aspirations and goals, and to perceive themselves in relation to exemplary models of effective teaching. The theory-practice ap- proach to preparing teachers related the abstract to the concrete and resulted in the interactions among the interns with pupils and communities becoming meaningful. The staff and experienced teachers lived with the interns. Their personal relations grew and developed so that when employment time came at the end of the pre-service period, the staff and experienced teachers were able to recommend whirh interns should be continued in the program and which should not. Their recommendations were particularly valuable when the com- positions of the teams were being determined. They knew the interns sufficiently to know who would work cooperatively with whoni. Also, the interns had formed informal groups among themselves, and these groups served as a basis for the composition of the teams. Thus, the corpsmen began their in-service work with close personal relationships among themselves and with the experienced teachers and staff menibers of the University. The in-service period has been characterized by many difficulties. Possibly the most perplexing to all parties is the fact that Congress did not appropriate funds for the operation of the in-~ervi(e phase of the program uIitil time middle of October. Here \va s a group of eiithu~ia~tic People who had faith in the program. in the TJ.~. ( )ffie if Education, the University. and the School System, but had no laconic. Much tffoi-t had gone into developing the pri gram ii could not he terminated until funds became available and then started again. The administration of the Atlanta Public Schools did not w-ish to have time interns abused and to depart from the ( `ity if Atlanta. The administration felt a moral obligation, from a personal and a I)r(graflm point of view, to moet the crisis some way, to carry out its tart of the agreement, if only fumnds could he found. The ~ Office of Education approved the continuance of the stiJ(eII(1 \Vhi( h the PAGENO="0485" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1307 interns were receiving froni the University of Georgia during the pie-service period, and the Atlanta Public Schools sul)plefllellted thin stipelul b iiiake the monthly salary equal to that which was stipulated iii the ProPo~a1-tl1e itasis on which the interns had joined the National Teachers ( orb-. Federal funds did iiot become available until October 23. ilififi. and now. the admiiiistration of the school system has been informed that Federal funds cannot be Use(1 to reimburse the School System for the supplements it paid while trying to preserve the program and the image of all parties concerned. The (lecisioll that the System cannot be reimbursed is very difficult to comprehietid. Other than problems arising because of the manner in which the program has been funded, the National Corps Program in Atlanta is resulting iii many beiie- fits to the schools it serves. The corpsmen are having a wholesome effect on other teachers. New practices are appearing, and participation iii team activi- ties is serving as a menus to improve instructional procedures. The value of planning in groups in order to use effectively the interests and talents of the members of the group is being demonstrated. Involvement of parents and con- tacts with community resources are becoming greater. More pupils are attend- ing kindergarten. Male teachers are serving in the signitnant role of father- image for many pupils who do not have a father in the honie. Improvement in the utilization of instructional media and materials is noticeable. Use of prob- 1cm-solving seminars is helping interns to make theoretically based decisions of actual situations. Lower pupil-teacher ratios are permitrilig pupils to receive nit re individualized attention. Solutions to personal pr d demn s are lesseitiuig as the interns gain security and confidence in their ability to teach. Most, if not all, of the interns wish to remain in the System, sonic iii different assign- muients. Experienced teachers are improving their competemnies because of the leadership responsibilities during this year. Niuie of tile remaining fifteen interns gained admission to the Graduate School of the University of Georgia and are pursing a Master's Degree in Early Childhood Education: six have already become certificated to teach; the remaining nine are working toward certification. It is anticipated that the interns will accomplish these objectives if the pro- gram is funded for the two-year period as iiiitiallv proposed amid if funded ill sufficient time for the interns to thus plan. Pupils are benefiting by the services rendered by the corpsmen. Time National Teacher Coi-ps Program in Atlanta is having au impact on exi~ting procedures for identifying, recruiting, and preparing tea(hers. It is making possible the development of team relationships munong teachers who have a background of nation-wide experiences. It is serving as a career development prrgram in which theory and practice are combined for individuals who, in general, have a liberal arts background. The college staff has the assistance of experienced teachers who have realistic views of appropriate pro('e(lures for te:~hing pupils from low-income families. In giving this assistance, the experienced teachers serve as exemplary models, demonstrating effective tema-hing procedures and utilization of nicslern technol egy in the cIa ssroomn. Daring the pre-servire period, an interdisciplinary approach to preparing tea-hers was extended. commihining training in the liberal arts with the behavioral sciences, with the sociological influences in communities, and with the policies and procedures of school systems and local school units. Visitations into the hommies. into communities, with community agencies, and with pupils gave the interns knowledge of the pupils and their enviromnent.s prior to the interns' a ssumning instructional responsibilities. Personal knowledge concerning flue competencies of the interns enabled the staff of the college and the experienced tearhers to be of tremendous value to the local educational agency in the employment, and placement processes. During the in-service period, the college and local agency continue to share the responsibilities for training. supervising, and assisting interns in determining solutions to classroom problems. either thr~'e of a l)rofessional or personal nature. More and more. educators recognize that college students who complete prescribed teacher preparation programs are not ready to assume the full responsibilities of a classroom. They do not represent finished products. They need assistance and guidance in order to cope with the many problems which are not included in teacher preparation pro~rarns. and which arise while teaching. A partnership comiiposed of the local educational agency and the institution of higher education. and ~s set forth in the National Teacher Corps. is one means for analytically and concretely relating the improvement of instruction to the preparation of teachers. PAGENO="0486" 1308 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Educators are examining many ideas concerning the improvement of instruc- tion and the preparation of teachers. The overall approach by the National Teacher Corps might be viewed as one approach to two very complex problems. As; in the case of any approach, sufficient lead and operational time and sufficient funds guaranteed well in advance of the implementation date are needed for a period longer than one year in order to evaluate the effectiveness of a program. The staffs of the Atlanta Public Schools and the University of Georgia and the corpsmen appreciate the opportunity to make these comments about the National Teacher Corps. It is believed that all parties concerned will profit by the exchange of inforniation and, regardless of the direction taken in the future for the C'~rps, ideas concerning teacher preparation and pupil instructional programs will have been strengthened. Mr. BRADEMAS. First of all I was struck by a statement., Dr. Let.son, and your comments that the Teacher Corps has been designed by teachers, principals, and educational people and you had gotten a lot of people at. the local level involved in the shaping of the program. That may be one of the reasons some of the others indicated there did not seem to be much friction among the Teacher Corps mem- bers and the schoolteachers in your system. I think, also, running through your entire comments, t.hose of all of you, was one major criticism of the Corps; namely, t.hat we have not funded the program early enough to enable you to do an effective job of recruiting the best possible interns. Am I wrong in either of those conclusions? Dr. LETSON. No. sir, Mr. Chairman; you are quite right. We feel most of the problems we ha.ve had have been direct.ly related to the timing of the funding problem. I know there was a period of several months where. there was some uncertainty on the part of some of the interns about where their pay was going to come from. I know in our situation, the Atlant.a school system said we felt we had an obligation to help see this thing through if necessary a.nd we made a positive commitment. to the interns that we were not going to go back on the original commitment that had been made. We felt that tills helped us get over that. trying period for a few months but it certainly was related to the point ou mentioned. Mr. BIL\DEMAS. Miss Haskins, in -s-our conversations with your fellow interns, what, in your judgment. persuaded them to become members of the Teacher Corps. as (list inguished from becoming schoolteachers in other situations ? Miss I1~si~ixs. I think the fact that this program was designed to hel1) the disadvantaged children was one of the. main factors in their entering the program and also they would be pursuing a master's degree. These two things working together caused many people to apply to the program. It. was a good idea to ge.t into it. Mr. BriADr~r~~s. Could we get. some comment either from you, Mrs. Goodwin, or from you. Miss Hornshy, on the attitude of the other teachers toward the interns? Miss i-iorixsiiy. The teachers have received the members of the team very well and I believe tile main reason is the fact that. they knew it was going to reduce the size of the teacher-pupil ratio, No. 1. No. 2. the children who entered the school had not I)eefl exposed to any cultural activities and when they come to school they are just not ready for the formal program. With the Corps, they have been ex- PAGENO="0487" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTTCATION AMENDMENTS 1309 posed to very many other activities that would raise the cultural level. In addition to that, we have more individual attention, so even if a teacher is teaching seventh grade she feels she would reap the benefit of that even 7 years later. Mrs. GoDwIN. I think Miss Hornsbv has brought out the fact it. is important for children to have individual attention and small-group work. I think this has brought about a very good feeling between the regular teachers and the Corps members and the regular teachers are beginning to look to some of the Corps members for ideas which they are gleaning from their inservice work and also from their readings. We have shared books and we have shared ideas and learned from one another and the feeling of c.ooperation has grown as time went on. Mr. BRADEMAS. The last question I have., Dr. Letson, I might put to you. I think of one of the major concerns expressed by some members of our committee. I must say I have not heard it expressed by any of the school superintendents out in the country so far, or even State superintendents of public instruction. This is an apprehension about. Federal meddling or Federal control or Federal intervention of some unwarranted kind with the operation of the local school system. I would be interested in any comment you may make on that with respect to the Teacher Corps. Dr. LETSON. Mr. Brademas, in this program I can say categorically that we have had no evidence whatsoever of any undesirable Federal direction. This has been an Atlanta program. It was our responsi- bility even in the early stages to determine what we felt was most important to do with some resources from the Teacher Corps. We made that decision. We made the decision that we would start at the preschool, kindergarten level. W~e made the. decision about the selection of our experienced teachers and, in regard to your previous cluestion. I think this is another point.. One of the reasons that we have had no problem in relationship with teachers throughout the school system is the fact that our team leaders are outstanding. recognized members of our staff. They knew the. city, they knew the personnel, and they moved iiito it tight. away: that made it possible to effectively utilize the resources of the Corps. Also a part of our problem not only relates to those areas where the members of the Teacher Corps are directly assigile(l. A part of our problem is to stimulate changes throughout the. school system. and. in a sense, these five experienced teachers that. have been associated with this program have not only contributed to the areas of the Teacher Corps itself I)ut they have contributed and have s~ imiilated professional changes and improvements throughout the various schools in which they work. I believe there is one of the great contributions that has been made by this program. Mr. BRADEMAS. Thank you. Mr. Ayres? Mr. AYRES. Dr. Letson, I am not saying that. this is going to happen. but in the event that the Congress should not appropriate the funds to continue the Teacher Corps program. (10 you feel that. it has been so successful in the private area that. you would plopose that. it he eon- PAGENO="0488" 1310 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS tinned at the. local level insofar as the cost of operations was concerned? Dr. LETSON. I would certainly propose, Mr. Ayres. that we proceed as far as we can to continue somewhat the same program. I am not at all certain that we could continue as it is now established. I know that the resources with which we could approach it would not make it possible to do what. needs to be done in this area. I would want to emphasize again that one of the greatest contri- butions that the Teacher Corps can make and is making is to establish a. sense of pride on the part. of a particular group to move into these culturally deprived areas. This has been the source of a. large part of our problem, that out' better people would prefer to go to the easier, more socially acceptable areas of the community. If we can establish as I think the Teacher Corps has made a good beginning in doing, if we can establish that there is a badge of recognition and approval on the part of a. dedicated group that. moves into these areas, then I am convmced that we will make tremendous strides in ot.her areas of the school system in attract- ing more capable people to the culturally deprived areas, and that in the final analysis is our greatest need. Mr. AYIIES. Are you saying, Doctor, that. it is not. necessarily a lack of funds but. a lack of incentive and dedication that has prevented these deprived children from having people with the qualifications of those. going into the Teachers Corps filling the gap? Dr. LETSON. I am saving that regardless of whether we wanted this to be the case or not., it has been generally accepted down through years that. the better teachers would be. recognized as being better teachers by an assignment to a more culturally deprived community. I think this is a hard thing to attack. It has been generally felt by a large part of our professional staff, for example. that to be assigned to a culturally deprived school was just some evidence that. possibly the teacher had not done as effective a job as he should have domie, as untrue then as that may have been. I do feel that it. is urgent that we develop a kind of spirit and a kind of opportunity to recognize the dedication that many teachers really feel by establishing the fact. that service in a culturally deprived school or neighborhood is a rewarding professional service that carries with it. the kinds of professional rewards that would be recognized generally throughout the community. I think t.he Teachers Corps has helped us accomplish this. I think the national aspect of it helps to give, it. that image. Mr. AvRrs. Many of us here in the Congress who were here through the National Defense Education Act provided a special incentive for those who wanted to go into teaching. Many of us felt at that tim.e that I)erhaps it. might. be advisable to even give a further incentive or in- ducement for those who wanted to follow the teaching profession to go into these areas that are not necessai'ily the easiest ones to teach in. Do you feel that peithaps we could ii's~~~ that line under the Na- tional Defense Education Act.? Dr. LETSON. Mr. Ayres, I do not believe it is a. matter that is solved solely by salary. I think that the intangible evaluations of this kind of service are. more potent in attracting people, capable peo- ple, to these positions than the money aspect of it. PAGENO="0489" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1311 I think that progress is being made in direct proportion to our ability to give a sense of accomplishment and achievement and belong- ing and real participation to dedicated people as the are placed 1fl these culturally deprived schools and are recognized for the value for the service they render and are given a working situation that makes it possible for them to do an effective job. Mr. AYRES. Perhaps I should direct this question to the young lady from Richmond. Do you feel that those with w-hom you are associated are just as interested in pursuing their additional graduate work as they are in teaching in the deprived area.s? In other words, is the real incentive the opportunity to go ahead and be teaching in these deprived areas while at the same time, as you stated, working toward your master's? Miss HASKINS. I think their first interest~ is in teaching the disad- vantaged. Here you can see the gain. Most of these children need help very badly and it is a motivation to go to school every day to try to help them. Of course we are very interested in pursuing our education be- cause most good teachers are always trying to improve themselves, but our main interest lies with the children. Mr. Ayi~s. If you get your master's degree you will continue in the field of education? Miss HASKINS. Yes. Dr. Lm'SoN. May I comment, Mr. Ayers, Thomasine did not have the goal in college or objective to become a teacher and she would have been lost to the t.eaching profession, in my judgment, had it not been for this program that gave her an opportunity to see what oppol- tunities were available in this field. Mr. AYRES. Do you feel there are a number of those now in the Corps who fall basically into the same category as this young lady? Dr. LETSON. Yes, sir; I do, and I feel if we can accomplish the financing of the program in order to permit the kind of recruiting and the kind of evaluation, that w-e will get an increasingly large number of young people in this same category who would not other- wise have been teachers. You see, many of them remember or know about teaching only in terms of their own experience in going through school. Many of them have no understanding of the kind of rewards that would be involved in helping children in these deprived neighborhoods. As they experi- ence it under a condition that. makes it. possible for them to work effectively and under the guidance of an experienced teacher, they begin to recognize these rewards and appreciate them and I am con- vinced that it. would attract many capable people in the teaching profession. Mr. FORD. Mr. Avres caine. toward the end to this question of what. is most likely to motivate teachers to work now in the areas we are talking about. Maybe Atlanta is not, time best part of our country to solicit, an answ-er to this because you stand out in the part. of the country that. I come from as a. fine example not. only for the South hut time rest. of the country. The frustration over finding a way to en- courage teachers to want to go into and stay in the tough schools has been felt. in some of our large cities. In Detroit., where I again have PAGENO="0490" 1312 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTCATION AMENDMENTS some familiarity with the situation, a teacher looks forward the second time he signs a contract to go into a nicer school and he works closer and closer to working outside the city all the time, looking for nicer facilities and surroundings, and this is human nature. In some feeling of frustration, there has been a suggestion in the past you might try combat pay. It has actually been described in this fashion. For some of our teachers who have to teach m some large areas, there are these problems. Perhaps you have seen what has been going on in New York City the last. few days. Perhaps the way to keep teachers in these areas would be to compensate them. Of course this is Opposite to the con- cept of the Teachers Corps which follows the great success we have found in the Peace Corps an.d VISTA, where people who are very obviously far better qualified than the average to go out and be a success in almost anything they try, are working not only for lower compensation, but generally in alien surroundings, and they have been very successful. I notice you have six States represented in the interns that. you now have working in Atlanta. Recognizing that you are a rather large city for your part of the countr, would you have this kind of a mixture in your general teaching group in the elementary schools or would they tend mostly to be local product? Dr. LRTS0N. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I think we would have that large distribution in our teachers generally. We engage each teacher in an extensive recruiting program that involves all of the Southern States and most of the border States. We do have a fairly cosmopol- itan group. I would comment that in my judgment the combat pay approach is not the answer. I think the most. effective answer is to create the cir- cumst-anees and the conditions in our culturally deprived schools and neighborhoods that will make it possible for good professional teach- ers to effectively perform their jobs. ~\Ir. Forn. There is a second aspect. of this that you touched on. You mentioned that you picked as the leaders people who were familiar with their community and were recognized in your system as outstandin~ teachers. Is there evidence that the interns are likely to be capable of infecting other people when they leave your system or even if they stay in your system with the new thoughts and new ideas about dealing with young people with special problems approaching the normal educational factories that we run in this country? Dr. LETSON. We have no statistical evidence, Mr. Chairman, that this is true. We have on the basis of subjective judgment, however, a firm conviction that it is true. Mr. FORD. Mr. Meeds of New York used the expression esprit de corps in here the other day, arid he felt this was an important factor in having a national type Teacher Corps. Is there evidence that there is a prestige factor operating with regard to the interns and lay teach- ers in your system that would indicate that they as people identified as committed to the Teacher Corps enjoy some prestige as the result of this, with the other tea chers, that is? Dr. LETSON. There is some evidence that this is true. I think that our program has been in operation for too brief a period to really have PAGENO="0491" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1313 it operate as effectively as I think it can and will as time goes on, but I certainly agree that the esprit de corps aspect of it. is a part of the attraction that can be brought to bear on both the recruitment and the effective operation of this program. Mr. FORD. One final question. Do you feel that as the Corps has operated up until now there has been any resistance on the part. of your school administrators to the teachers coming as part of a Teacher Corps rather than as a part of a clearly identifiable local teacher training program? In other words, do you detect that it might be easier to have a school principal accept. one of your regular Atlanta teachers for a special project than it. would be to have perhaps this young lady come down from Virginia and work? Dr. LETSON. We have detected very little, if any, Mr. Chairman, of that attitude. It is quite possible that it. prevails in spots. I think it will be responsive to the approaches that would normally be made in terms of the quality of the PeoPle that are selected and the quality of the job that they do. I certainly feel that the acceptance of this program has been wide- spread on the part of our school people because of the growing recogni- tion of the fact. that if we are truly going to teach children from a cul- turally deprived background. we must find ways of doing somewhat differently from the way we have tried to do it in years past. A part of this is a reduction in pupil-teacher ratio. We must have teachers to work with smaller groups. If we attempt to do this on the basis of our re~ular ongoing program with local support, then we im- mediately run into the kinds of questions, "W~ell, how can I justify a teacher for ei~ht children here and you have a teacher for 30 children here?" It is possible of resolution and I know we must find ways of doing it hut I feel very positively that the programs like the Teacher Corps that provide in terms of the basic structure itself that a school system may not reduce the nuniber of teachers that it employs. It is a. supplementary program. And it is much easier to implement and get the. returns from it than would be the case if it were just a part of the overall budgeted operation. Mr. FORD. Mr. Scherle. Mr. ScIIERLv. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am sorry I was not in here at the beginning because this is a de- partment. in which I am vitally interested. I have areas of misgivings and areas of apprehension and I think from the short period of time that this program has been innovated there have been many pros and cons to tins program. Let me ask you this question: In Atlanta do on now have kinder- ~arten? Dr. LETSON. We do not statewide but. we do in Atlanta and possil)ly two other cities within the State. Mr. SCHERLE. Why do you not have kinder~arteui if you think that Headst art is such a wonderful program? Dr. LETSON. Of course we have answered that in the city of Atlanta because. we do have a publicly supported kindergarten but there is no statewide program of support. of the kindergarten program. PAGENO="0492" 1314 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS The result. of those same kinds of factors have prevented education from being supported as effectively as it should down through the years. Mr. SCHERLE. How can you actually justify a national Headstart program if the State itself is not taking care of the youngsters within the confines of your own State ? Dr. LETSON. It is a matter of relative values and it is a matter of choice. If a State in its financial program has limited resources or relatively limited resources, then the State makes its decision as to where those resources will purchase the largest educational return. Thus far the State of Georgia has not seen fit to implement. a state- wide kindergarten program, but in the city of Atlanta we have been willing and the city has for many years devoted local resources en- tirely to the operation of this kindergarten, and the Headstart program is not operating during the regular school year, Mr. Scherle, but is a summer program primarily preliminary to coming into the kinder- garten in the fall. Mr. SdH~m~. This is what interests me. This is a. 6-week program, is it not? Dr. LETSON. Yes, sir. Mr. SCHERLE. Your Headstart program is what age group? Dr. LETSOX. Four and a half to five years old. Mr. SCHERLE. Would you advocate three? Dr. LETSON. Yes. It would have to take its place in terms of relative values. If we had the resources; yes. Mr. SCHERLE. Then how can you justify a 6-week program during the summer months in some of the areas and yet not ask your State legislature to set up a program for a beginning of your elementary schooling and institute a kindergarten? Dr. LETSON. The educators in the State of Georgia have made such requests but thus far we have not been able to convince the legislature of the desirability in terms of relative values they have not. im- plemented it. But I would again want t.o point out the Headstart children in Atlanta do move right into a regular kindergarten program. They are riot, left high and dry following this Headstart experience. Mr. SCHERLE. Would you advocate the transfer of Headstart Con- trol to your State department of public, instruction ? Dr. Lrn'sox. Yes, sir; I would certainly advocate its transfer into the U.S. Office of Education and into the State educational program without any question of a doubt in my mind. Mr. SCHERLE. I also not.ice. here on page 3 of the testimony the low pupil-teacher ratio. What do you comprehend would be a sizable group to sat.isfy and justify what you are trying to do m a 6 weeks period of time? Dr. LETSON. You are talking about Headstart. now? Mr. ~CTIERLE. les. Dr. LETSOX. We have felt that a group of 15 wa.s a reasonable nurn- her for I-Ieadstart. Mr. SCHERLE. Do you think that t.he Government should be allowe.d to solicit, or recruit teachers to work in your given area rather than Ieavnni it to 10(01 control ? PAGENO="0493" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATIOX AMENDMENTS 1315 I). LETSOX. Mr. Scherle, I think the Governiiieiit an render a real service in identifying prospective employees but that would not mean that the local school system abdicated its responsibility for this or its right to determine in the final analysis whether an individual became a part of that local school system or not. I would insist on that right for every local school system but I think the Teacher Corps or professional association as the NEA has recently done, I think, can render a real service in compiling, in locating and compiling various information about individuals in order that there would be a clearing- house. Mr. BRADEMAS. I am afraid the time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. Dellenback. Mr. DELLENBACK. I see the time limit is an oppressive one at this stage. I don't think there is any of us who is not deeply concerned about trying to benefit the disadvantaged and t.he stories you tell of the youngster who speaks and walks. Certainly there are moving tales that may be very thrilling and difficult to live with, as I am sure we would find. Our problem in questioning on this is not to attack but to realize even on a Federal level there are limited dollars involved and what. we are reaching for in part iii our questioning, at least so far as 1 am con- cerned, is to reach in the direction of how best we can use the. dollars to achieve those goals we would like to achieve. This is one alternative. One plan. May I ask Dr. Letson this question. Realizing the goal is improvement of education, quality, and equality-wise, so far as At- lanta. is concerned, would you be able to do a better job if the funds that are poured into the program, the Teacher Corps program, were to be handed to you with no strings attached and you were told to use them for the training of teachers? - Would you be able to do a better job or would you do an inferior jol) compared to the Teacher Corps. Dr. LETSON. That is a difficult question to answer. I think there might be some isolated cases, cities where a bett.er job or an equally good job might be done, but I would definitely hestitate t.o make that a nationwide conclusion. Mr. DELLENBACK. I am talking in your area of competence, At- lanta. Let's ignore all other cities and just talk about the. Atlanta school system. If you were having a choice of the same number of dollars that went. into the National Teacher Corps used thiei-e. for the Teacher corps versus being handed to you with the instruction that you were to use these for t.raining teachers for the disadvantaged, which way would you do a superior job? Dr. LETSON. I am still of the opinion, Mr. Dellenback, that we would be able to do a better job through the Teacher Corps. This would require some explanation. I think there is a distinct, advantage in the national identificat.ion of prospects. We would not, for example, have been able to get. Miss Haskins as a part of the Atlanta school system had it not been for this process. Tn the first place, I doubt that she would have been coIning into any s'uool system as a. teacher. So I think that is a service. PAGENO="0494" 1316 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS But in the fiuial analysis the Teacher Corps does almost exactly what you are saying because from our point of view this is a local program. We are using the dollars that are made available. Mr. DELLExBAcI~. Is this exactly the way you would use them if the dollars were handed to you? Dr. LE'rsox. Well, had this not been originally a part of a plan we might have varied from it in some respects. Mr. DELI~Exn~c1~. What if it were the case for the next year? How many (lollars have gone into the Teacher Corps program in the Atlanta area? Dr. LETSON. Frankly, I don't even know the total of our budget. There were some misgivings at one time as to how much would be available. Mr. I)ELLExBACIc. Let~s assume it was $100,000. I don't have any idea what it is. You now have some 15 teacher interns. With that same 1O().000-would you have been able to have brought in more than l.~ if von were left full iml)lelflentation on your own? Dr. LETSOX. I doubt it, because the same amount of money would have been involved in the payment of salaries of either interns or additional teachers and as this program is being proposed in the amendment to title I involving the Teacher Corps, it does involve a reduction in salary and would be a lower salary t.haii our interns in general have received this year. Mr. DELLENiv~c1~. As I listen to the testimony, and forgive my breaking in, but the chairman is about to hit that gavel, I am afraid, as we move forward in studying the program we realize that part of the gain as I listen to the testimony is in having people like Thomasine i nvol vecl. Part of the gain as I listened to Mrs. Hornby's testimony and Mrs. Goodwins is also in great improvement within the attitude of present teachers~ stimulants, all sort of gain to those who are now teaching. Could von not have used this amount of money very advantageously to stimulate, to inspire, to improve the present teachers? Dr. LETSON. Yes. Are you proposing, for example, that this would be an a(lditional amount of money that would permit a reduction in pupil-teacher ratio across the board? Mr. DEu~ExB~~c1c I am miot sure what you would do with it.. You come here to testify for time Teacher Corps and you like the results that. have followed so von find yourself backing the Teacher Corps. Mv concern is not Teacher Corps for or against. Mv concern is the results that have followed and what I am asking is could you have done a. better 1ob in reaching results-eall it any name von want- I am interested in resiilt~. With limited dollars could you have done a superior ~ob if rbiht now or next veal we say "Push the Teachers Corps ~)rogia1n aside and we give you in Atlanta the same number of dollars that went into the Teacher Corps program \Vould you (10 an inferior job to what was done last year or would von do a superior job to what was (lone last year? I)r. LETSOX. In the first place, I think there are seine serious ques- tions that the congress would approach it that. way. ~\[r. T)ELLEXBACK. That is not your worry but. ours. I)r. LETSOX. We have to determine in education just like in busi- ness how much return can we purchase with every dollar we spend. PAGENO="0495" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1317 That is basically the question you are asking. Could we spend the same number of dollars that has been devoted to the Teacher Corps and secure a larger educational return in airy way ? It is almost impossible to give a simple yes-or-no answer. I think in some instances it might. be possible. In general, on a nationwide basis, I doubt it. I doubt it in Atlanta. Mr. DELLENBACK. Don't. hit other areas. but in Atlanta you feel you would not have done as well? Dr. LETSON. I a.m afraid we would not. Mr. BRADEMAS. We must now recognize the gentleman from Wis- consin, Mr. Steiger. Mr. STEIGER. In trying to l)riefly go through all of your testimony you raise some interesting points and do a good job in supporting your posit ion. Dr. Letson, if I mav, how many teachers in the Atlanta school sys- tem usually request a transfer out of whatever you call it. the core area, the disadvantaged area? What kind of a problem do you have with teacher transfers? Dr. LETSON. We have a sizable probleni in that. we do have a con- siderable number of teachers each year who request a transfer. We cannot honor all of those transfer. We do to the extent possible in terms of what we feel is for the best interests of the school system. We honor the transfers if we can, but have more requests for such transfers than we can honor. In all honesty, I would have to acknowledge the fact that the race issue has been a part of this factor and has stimulated some of these requests. It has also stimulated some of the reverse kind of action that have brought some teachers into these deprived areas, also. Mr. STEIGER. On page 6 of your statement you say lower pupil- teacher ratios help, and so forth. How do you work your program with the Teacher Corps in creating this lower pupil-teacher ratio? Do you put a Teacher Corps team into an are.a where now you have 30 or 35 pupils per teacher? Can you give me any indication of just how you have tried to work this? Dr. LETSON. Wre have staffed all of our schools the same as had we not had a Teacher Corps team. Then the Teacher Corps team moves in as an additional personnel and as an additional resource for that particular school which means that instead of-and our kindergarten is on a two-group basis, one group coming in the morning and one in the afternoon. This means 30 children for 1 teacher in the mornino and 30 children for 1 teacher in the afternoon. With the Teacher Corps we have been able to divide this group of 30 children in both sections into smaller groups in oider that the Teacher Corps corpsmen could work with them on an ifl(lividual or more individual basis and engage in a lot of those activities that were referred to here. ~\[r. STETGER. We had some testimony yesterday in regard to the pro~;im of the Bank State College in New York in conjunction with the Office of Education. which is the development of what we con call paraprofessional, or teachers aids, or what title von wish to give theni. May I ask for your own assessment as to the value of a reacher-oil type of program? Let me point to the testimon~- that Mis. GoOti\v]il PAGENO="0496" 131S ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS gave in \vlIiclI she pointed to some of the programs that the Teacher Corps teams were involved in. such as trips, and so forth. Is this really au appropriate area for the Teacher Corps team? Would that perhaps be more appropriate for the work that a paraprofessional might do? Dr. Li~i'sox. I think certainly there are. aspects of it that a para- professional could do. May I answer your question generally? I have a very definite personal belief that the utilization of teacher aids offers tremendous possibilities. I think the teacher profession has probably been slower than any other in the utilization of subprofes- sional people. Since we are finding it difficult to secure a sufficient number of pro- fess ion~1 teachers, I think we have to work out ways where experienced teachers can magnify their influence by directing teacher aids or teach- er assistants. In part, the Teacher Corps program has a relationship to this belief. I think in time the Teacher Corps program itself might expand into the acceptance of teacher aids and the training of teacher aids or in- dividuals for teacher aids quite appropriately. Mr. STEIGER. I am glad to hear you say that. Thank you, Mr. Chair- man. Mr. BRADEMAS. Mr. Letson, Miss Newman, Mrs. Goodwin, Miss Hornby, Miss Haskins, we thank you for coming. We appreciate your coming. I am coming down to Spelman College in May, and I will try to come visit you in the field when I come down there. Dr. LETSON. We would be honored to have you visit us any time, Mr. Chairman. Mr. BRADEMAS. Dr. Donald Wilson and Dr. Leonard Osview are our next witnesses. DR. DONALD E. WILSON, DIRECTOR, TEACHER EDUCATION, SCHOOL OF EDUCATION, UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALLFORNIA Dr. WILSoN. My name is Donald E. Wilson, Director of Teacher Education, National Teacher Corps, University of Southern Cali- fornia. May I have this document placed in the record. It is froni the Los Angeles Herald Examiner, Saturday, March 11, 1967, issue and if possible I would like to submit it as evidence in the hearing. Mr. BRADEMAS. Without objection it. will be included in the record. (The document follows:) (From the Los Angeles Herald Examiner, Mar. 11, 1967] TEACHER Coiu~s MAKES IMPACT IN WATTS THEY HUSTLE EDUCATION (By Elmer Wells) Last summer 36 Xational Teacher Corps volunteers gathered at the West- minster Neighborhood Association Center in the heart of Watts as pioneers on a new educational frontier. The poverty, apathy and despair of the community were apparent. So wa.s the Negro community's distrust of its Caucasian neighbors. South Los Angeles was plainly skeptical. It wanted to make sure these NTC recruits, uuiany from white, American middle-class backgrounds, were not merely do-gooders. PAGENO="0497" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1319 It wanted to make sure they meant it when they said they seek to help the area's children break the cycle of poverty's pervasive pathology-lack of self- respect and lack of hope for the future. The NTO recruits and their leaders were warned they would be rejected, and that the Caucasians among them were suspected of being "blue-eyed devils." Given warnings They were warned that any showing of middle-class disgust with the raw life of the district would mean failure. So would any aloof pupil-teacher-parent relationship. And to succeed they would have to get out into the community, into the homes and live and suffer and work with the people-long, long hours. "That's the only way," said one speaker, "you can help show these children that the fast-buck hustler, with his flashy car and women really isn't a hero. And the real heroes are the boys and girls and parents themselves, when they invest in education and responsibility, not only for today but tomorrow." Another speaker flatly stated: "No matter what you do, the children of this area are going to reject you." Rovgh at first "Hustle education if you want to succeed in the ghetto, baby," the recruits were challenged. And that's what they are doing today. "They were rough on us," admits Dr. Donald Wilson, NTC director here, referring to that Watts meeting on a hot August day, just a year after the com- munity blazed with gunfire an(l Molotov cocktails. "But we didn't lose a volunteer. And no one quit when they had to work for two months without pay." Aim of the Corps, Dr. Wilson explains, is to give teachers and college gradu- ates who want to go into the profession work-study experience in the spirit, skills and ghetto savvy to be successftl in poverty area schools. Scattered throughout the nation are 1227 men and women Corpsmen. Of these 262 are veteran teachers and 965 recent college graduates. But all want profes- sional careers in teaching disadvantaged children. The Corpsmen are in work-study programs in 275 schools and 111 school systems throughout the nation which cooperate with 50 university training centers. USC is the university training center for the NTC project in this area. Work- ing with the university are four school districts. Two of these are in the Watts area, at the virtually all-Negro Willowbrook and Enterprise school districts. The others are in the predominantly Mexican-Ameri- can Garvey district in East Los Angeles, and Jurupa in Riverside County. New friends Although the Teachers Corps is relatively new, w-hat's going on in Wi~lowbrook and Enterprise indicates the volunteers are `hustling education" as admonished. It also indicates that many parents and pupils in these communities, who for years have looked on the teacher as a sort of "policeman," are eagerly grasping for the helping hand of a new schoolhouse friend. Frank Spite, principal of Pioneer School in the Enterprise District, a Negro, debunks the idea that the community rejects "blue-eyed devils' coming to teach in its schools." Spite noted that the 36 Corps "interns" and 8 leaders in his and other school districts involved are making an impact. The other districts are Willowbrook in the Watts area, Garvey in East Los Angeles and Jurupa in Riverside County. For one thing, they have been able to ease the class burden of other teachers. Thus children are receiving more individualized instruction and show-ing im- provement. Not only that, the Corpsmen have set up education and information programs for parents, and visited many homes, not as a policeman, but as a friend from the school. The parents, he said, are no different from those anywhere. They want their children to succeed, "and they expect to do this from education. They look on teachers as teachers." (Jut vandalism W. H. Betton, principal at Mark Twain School, also a Negro, says the Corps- men are helping him "to send home happy children." And when this happens "the word gets around." 75-492-67-pt 2-32 PAGENO="0498" 1320 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS In Willowbrook, Asst. Supt. Thruman Johnson tells how the Corpsmen are helping to save the district many thousands of dollars through a program aimed at cutting vandalism. Windows and doors were steady t.argets for vandals, he said. And during last Christmas vacation alone damage was $3000. This shocked the six NTC interns and their leader at the school. They decided to do something about it. The Corpsmen's solution was to each contribute a few dollars and hire teen- agers to guard the school. While it may sound like a `protection racket," the money has now become less important than the pride of taking care of "my school" and in pleasing the new- found teacher friends. Parents, teachers and administrators in the NTC schools reel off impressive lists of the school-community work the Corpsmen are undertaking, often at long, heartbreaking hours running into 60 and 70 hours a week. Among these are an open air movies in an area where no theater exists, taking children to zoos, the beach, museums, spending many hours tutoring children and their parents-and countless friendly home visits to show the school cares. Extra punch Raymond A. Shields, who at the age of 51 gave up a career as an adult teacher to study for his elementary credential as a NTC volunteer, "to do more for the community Fve worked in for 13 years," expressed the feeling of many Corpsmen in this way: "This is the extra punch that was needed and has been needed all along." Dr. Wilson says the "extra punch" is now in danger. Congress is debating whether to continue appropriations for the NTC. Being asked is $45.5 million for the next two years. Of this about $12.5 miliioii is iieeded to finish the two-year job already started. Job half (lOnG NTC officials say to cut off the program now would waste much money. For only half the job of training the first contingent of Corpsmen is com- pleted. Many of them, who have been receiving $5500 salaries plus tuition, still need a ye:~r to complete work for their masters degrees and, in California, a full teaching cre(lenh al. "The Watts riot cost about $40 million," said Dr. Wilson. "It would be a shame 0 kill a pr gram such as XT('. which has a good chance of preventing future catastrophies of that kind." Mr. BRADEMAS. I take it you do not have a prepared statement to distribute to us. Dr. WILSON. No, but I have material I could have duplicated and give it to you if you like. First of all I would like to say I am speaking not only for myself but all of the members of the Teacher Corps at the University of Southern California on behalf of the National Teacher Corps, and also for disadvantaged children that might not, if this program is not funded, or some similar program, might be further disadvantaged. I do not have to remind you that the problem of cities in the form it is not assuming is most urgent, the most difficult and most frighten- ing domestic problem that has emerged in recent years. It has been said we have left undone those things which we ought to have done and we have (lone those thiiigs which we ought to not have done. This ifl(iU(tCS first of all almost a complete failure to find out. and face the hard facts of modern, urban problems. The heart of the problem of the cities is a problem of the ghettos which have been claiming rights in the past few years. The careful research behind t.he Watts report shows school that is forced to accept as much as PAGENO="0499" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1321 25 percent of disadvantaged children virtually ceases to be a school and almost all of the children in the ghettos are very seriously dis- advantaged. The school becomes worthless because the teachers are unable. to to carry the huge extra burden of helping disadvantaged children, whether Negro, Mexican-Americans, or poor whites. The important thing is to provide him more teachers and much better teachers for all schools, particularly those schools carrying a serious burden of disad- vantaged pupils. The cities must be given superior schools, not just good schools, but immensely superior. The superior school should not merely cure the urban disease, they should also open the door out of the poverty trap for the children of the urban ghettos. At the University of Southern California we are cooperating with some four dist.ricts, three of which are in the Watts area, Willowbrook, and Enterprise. Another dis- trict, Bardy district., is in the eastern section of the city and predomi- nantly low Caucasian and Mexican-American communities, as is Jurupa, located in Riverside County. Prior to my coming I asked the superintendents in these districts to come to the university and discuss problems that we thought you would be interested in and also to receive their testimony that I could bring to you in terms of how they feel the National Teachers Corps is operating and what contribution it can make. The first question which we discussed was how can we justify the existence of a National Teachers Corps program. Why (to we need Federal funds? As I listen to the presentations this morning and your questions, this is a question which has been asked. Let me an- swer in terms of what the superintendents said in the various districts with which we are cooperating. Dr. Sieme.r from Jurupa stated the districts do not have financial resources to do the job. Mr. Dickey, superintendent of Willowbrook, stated often the districts with the greatest ne.ed are least able to finance programs to take care of that need. Mr. Hodes, assistant superintendent at Enterprise, stated our dis- trict. has been operating on a deficit budget for the last. 5 years. The assessed valuation in our area was cut considerably. If the Federal would subsidize farms, oil depletion, and so on, why can't human beings in urban areas be subsidized? Dr. Seaton said we need the quality offered liv a National Teachers Corps intern program. It is difficult to compete in the open market. for teachers and I might. again answe.r a question raised here before in ternis of getting teachers for these disa(lvantaged areas. In the fall of this year in Los Angeles, in the southeastern area, there were 900 vacancies. This spring there. were. 500 vacancies and ye.t the surrounding districts in Los Angeles County, I had superin- tendents, personnel, tell me in some instances there were 50 aI)pllcants for every position they had. Mr. BRADEMAS. These are in the suburban schools? Dr. WTILS0N. These are in the suburban schools. Dr. bate also stated in regard to his first question that we need more teachers to individualize teachers, and this means more money. The National Teacher Corps program offers internships which are in line with PAGENO="0500" 1322 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS other professions, which is as it should be. Dr. Hoate also said that. there are important byproducts of the National Teacher Corps pro- gram creating a corps of interns with interesting backgrotmds~ and. the program offers teacher education. Incidentally, in terms of background, I might indicate that we' have 36 interns. Let me also say in terms of the question that was raised on the question of esprit de corps that we feel we have a solid program at the university and despite the difficulties and uncertainties of fund- ing, we have not had a dropout from the intern program in the in- service phase. Again, in light of the criticism which had been raised during the summer in some of our meetings in the Watts area with some of the Mohammedans and Muslims, who were calling us blue-eyed devils- "Don't come back into our area"-but the interns were not frightened. They stayed and will probably continue to stay and teach in the areas. Mr. Dickey made the comment that the long-range effect is to up- grade the teaching profession itself and this is, again, what we have hea.rd as testimony. We feel the national teacher program is essential that we can focus attention on this particular community, that this community does need a special type of person. This program will allow us to select the most highly qualified per- sons. This gives us a larger selection process. Dr. Seton said that because of the national teacher program we are able to do more specialization than ever be.fore. We have never been able to provide this kind of program before, and if you were to ask me if we could (1u1)licate it. I would say we, too, at the university would need additional help because you need manpower to run a program such as this, and we have felt because of the national teacher program this has made our program highly effective. Another comment from Mr. Hoate is that if the National Teacher Corps training program is not. funded for another year, it would look like lust another promise going down the drain. There were other questions which we took up. The second question is what are the interns doing that could not ot.herwise have been done. Again, if you will permit. I will summarize for you some of the things that they are doing. and if you will look at the newspaper article, you will see that. the pictures will illustrate very nicely the areas in which they are working. Just to itemize some of these experiences, individual help is being provided for children with learning problems and in disadvantaged areas, as I read before. this is what we nee.d. We need additional help of the instructional staff to meet the individual and his prob- lems. When you have a classroom of 30 youngsters, one teacher is not sufficient to give t.he. attention necessary. Another is working with small groups of children with similar learning problems. The third is community involvement as preventive rather than as remedial. One of the interesting things that has developed in the Willowbrook area-high vandalism has been reported in the past, and Mr. Dickey does relate to this problem in the earlier testimony, that the vandalism has been reduced 20 to 30 percent this year. One of the reasons that t.hey can point to is that the National Teacher PAGENO="0501" ELEMEW~ARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1323 Corps team in the Marian Anderson School organized itself on Satur- day and after school to work with the high school youngsters who oftentimes are the source of the problem and organized them into taking leadership and in providing, if you will, a protection against other outsiders coming in to destroy school property. Community involvement has meant more than just working with juvenile delinquents. It has actually meant in many of these schooJs:~~ that the parents have been involved, have been brought in. They ha~ve: actually been in special classes of reading, of art, of speaking, and~ the interns have had a major responsibility. Special attention for discipline has been given to the interns. Special afterschool study hall and playground duty during recess with organized activities, special noon-hour athletic programs, general assistance to the total school staff, especially teaching English as a second language, speech classes-all of these things are working well. One specific example in another district where the.y had taken a survey, they found there were no movie houses, and one of our interns being affiliated w-ith t.he movie industry previously was able to get a projector and film and set up afterschool Saturday movies for the youngsters in the neighborhood. These are a few of the things which our interns are doing. They are assisting the regular classroom teacher and they are doing many things outside the classroom involved in community affairs. In Garvey, the teams and especially the team leaders are serving more or less as catalysts involving several youth agencies, both public and private. Each has a representative on the council and the team leaders are president and vice president of the council. They are developing a youth center for the teenagers, and some form of edu- cational program will evolve. There is a. new program involving the teaching of English as a second language. There is also a program to teach people about the economic system in which they live-the relationship of their money and the community to the running of the country. I could list many other specific activities that the interns are en- gaged in. They are engaged in these activities for many reasons. First of all, they are concerned with children. The want to help. There is a relatedness. Also, it serves as a very valuable laboratory for the course work they are taking at the university in sociology, psychology, and so on, and this can be related to their actual field experiences. Moving to still another area in terms of questions, how does this af- fect teacher education? I would say primarily it has served as a catalytic agent and set off a chain reaction not only at the university level but at the community level and in the school. First of all, the University has moved from the ivory tower into the actual field ex- perience. We think this is good. The National Teacher Corps at the university has prompted us to move in this direction. We have been able to staff the program as we think a prooram should be staffed. In other words, the University of Southern &lifornia, a private in- stitution, would not be able to provide such a program for all of its students. It has been primarily community centered. It has taken an interdisciplinary approach. It has cut across the academic fields, PAGENO="0502" 1324 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS as I nient i oned before-anthropology, sociology, psychology-and then after a period of time we have moved into the field of professional teaching with methodology and such. I new concept has emerged as far as teacher education is concerned, and that is in the team appioacli. We have SI)Okell of the team leader being responsible for the interns but at the university level we feel we have involved the team leaders as members of the instructional staff. We have l)rought in from the field, from the districts, the per- sonnel. the aclmiiii-~trative personnel, the welfare and attendance of- hcers. the school psychologists, the counselors as well as the principals, the team leaders, the experienced teachers. and they have all come together in deciding what the program should be. WTe feel this is a new concept where the university is no longer operating in a vacuum, bitt we are working and listening to those people on the fronthines and. again, this is an attribute of the National Teacher Corps. Rather than taking any more time, let me just ask a final question. I know you are concerned with and how effective has been this program. If I may again let me bring to you the testimony of our interns in terms of quotes. It is my fonUest hope that this program will serve as a model for other teacher ediiea i i onal programs. This ~rogr~i1P has made me realize the tremendous needs of youth to be edu- eaie1 iii a way chat will help them beeome useful citizens. It has been a great program. I wish I was at least three people so that I c~uld do three times what I am doing. The Teacher Corps just has to survive. The eomnnmity is be~.rinning to see the school as a friend who is willing to work with them in making their lives more meaningful. I would summarize by asking a question which has been raised before in terms of why should we invest in this program. I think it is going to come hack to von to make the decision where your sense of values really are. Are on going to put your faith in these things just because von have already given its Federal aid to education? We have instruments, we have equiprnent~ we have, materials, but the most important thin~ is to have the people who know what to do with these things, and I think the National Teacher Corps is a program dedi- cated to finding how the most effective was in which to work willi people and to make them useful contributing members of our society. Thank von. Mr. Brt.\I)EM\s. Thank you very much, Dr. WTilson. STATEMENT OF DR. LEONARD OSVIEW, ASSISTANT DEAN. COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, TEMPLE UNIVERSITY Mr. Osvirw. I am Leonard Osview from Temple University located in Philadelphia. Unlike many universities Temple University is not only in the city but as we boast, we are of the city. We have been identified with urban education for a long time. We are one of the three or four largest teacher education institutions in the country and we have always worked closetv in Philadelphia. Despite this fact. Philadelphia has had a chronic teacher shortage for as long as I know. I have only been iii Philadelphia 14 years and cei~tainly the teacher antedates me. The current shortage ~n the PAGENO="0503" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1325 Philadelphia schools runs around 11 to 12 percent so designated as vacancies. There are approximately 1,200 classrooms in the city of Philadelphia which have unqualified teachers, that is to say, they are not profes- sionally licensed. When the Teacher Corps began we saw this both in the school system of Philadelphia and at Temple University as an opportunity to recruit out of the pool of col1ege~ graduates people who would not otherwise have found their way into teacher education. We asked for something like 268 persons. We got about 40. The biggest thing that is wrong with the National Teacher Corps in our judgment is that. there are not enough Corps members. We could and would tomorrow mount. a program for five times the number we have today, and I believe we should. The attack on the teacher shortage problem in Philadelphia or any other large city also we think is only pait of the iceberg that appears before the water. We strongly regret~ the fact that many of the so-called second-class cities in Pennsylvania_Lancaster, York, Allentown, Reading, Erie- do not have Teacher Corps people and they need them just as desper- atelv as Philadelphia does. It seems to us to be a shame that they (To not have an Opportunity because of the very small number of corpsmen to qualify. W1~en the Teacher Corps began there was a certain amount-on the part of the teachers and principals of Philadelphia-of wait-and-see attitude and mavl)e even some downright, hostility. After all, the teachers in Philadelphia have had a tradition of becoming embittered about~ the attempts to solve their particular difficulties. Title I had not done much for theni except~ to say some teachers out of the classroom be put to other work. Title III didn't seem to be of much use except only to start~ some programs but as far as the typical teacher and the typical classroom in Philadelphia was concerned, the National Teachers Corps seemed to them to be just one more piece of this kind of special programing which left their lives relatively un- affected. I am prepared to tell you without any equivocation at all that this attitude has cliaiiged 180 degrees. No program is as much accepted as the Teacher Corps prog~~im is and that is true, of course, for several reasons. No. I is the Teacher Corpsmen work harder than most other people in teacher edlucation. They put in about a 67-hour week, week-in and week-out on the average. Both of which many of them do volunteer work in the communities. The second thing, of course, is that they are producing in the schools. The third thin2 ~S that they are learning things which the regular teachers have never really eve.r learned. One recent occurrence ma point this out. Philadelphia, as other large cities, has finally gotten around to the notion of intergroup education. The~ problem al)out which we are also concerned conies as a shock to most of the cities that have had the problem for 20 years without recognizing it particularly. The intergroup education, I am pleased to tell you, was largely led by corpsmen in the Philadelphia schools for the simple reason that PAGENO="0504" 1326 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS only the corpsmen had any intergroup education. The corpsman takes a 51-hour program leading toward his master's degree is some ~O hours more than the ordinary typical master's program. Seventy perce1~t of this programing is brand new. Seventy percent of the programing is the kind of thing that we have been wanting to do at Temple University and other teacher universities have been wanting to do for a long time but never have really had a chance to do. Part of this new programing is intergroup education and I might say that also has given us an opportunity to recruit. people on t.he staff knowl- edgeable in these areas whereas before that. time presumably we had no need for them, which of course is simply a gross error in our judgment. You have to recognize that. teacher education lags more badly than public school education does in keeping up with the times. This is a I)~~ of the function of teacher education financial support for teacher education as you well know is very light indeed. The Teacher Corps has had a very pronounced impact on our col- 1e~re~ of education and we hope on others not fortunate enough to have a Teacher Corps installation. For one thing we are beginning to get the kinds of programing changes we introduced in the Teacher Corps spread to our other program. How rapidly we can do this will depend on money and ability to find able staff. We are moving quickly and we have already put into our catalog four courses that we started for the Teacher Corps. I hope this is only the beginning. There were a number of questions raised early and I had hoped we would have an opportunity to answer those questions because frankly I was not happy the way they were responded to. There was a question about whether this ought to be a State de- partment project and I would have, to say absolutely not. From our point of view this should be a Federal project. We have had no inter- ference from NTC headquarters. We selected these people ourselves and we consider this to be a basic principle for the operation of Teach- er Corps. We would like to have a.s much glamour associated with recruiting people and there is more glamour out of Washington than Phila- delphia. We would like to get as much glamour in recruiting these people but. we would not have the program if we did not have the right to make the final selection and indeed for the Teacher Corps group we have now we did much of the recruiting and we would con- tinue to do so. We feel strongly as long as we make the final selection the program is ~uaranteed that much integrity. Not everyone can become a teacher. We will still give them the GRE test, paper and pencil interview that we applied to any other person who wants to become a teacher and wants to ~o through the Temple University to prepare for doing so. So we rntend to maintain that but we certainly don't mind having Washington give us the money to operate the program, to give us the kind of people from whom we can make the selection. I might say that Harrisburg is not prepared to do either very well, even if t.hey were using your money. We also believe tha.t the impact on teacher education amioyable in many other ways that ought to be understood not only by Congress, PAGENO="0505" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1327 of course, but by the citizens generally and certainly by all of the colleges of education. `We have about 16 different special programs operating out at the college of education and because I happen to be assistant dean for research and development in a sense these are all my responsibility. I would say we are deve1o~ing a very easily recogmzed attitude now among students which I think is great, and that is that we are be- ginning finally t.o understand that teachers have t.o be specialists in more t.han just their subject matter area. `What we are producrng through these special programs, not. only NTC but. the experienced teacher fellow'ship program as well, but. we are producing specialists in urban educat.ion and that is a new dimension for the college at Temple University. `We have a great deal of research, probably the best imown of which is bankers research in Chicago where he demonstrated how people leave the inner c.ity schools of Chicago after having been recruited to serve in t.hese schools after somet.hing he calls culture shock, reality shock. `We do not think these teachers will be lost to inner city because they are specialists in coping with the education of the dis- advantaged child. They get their best. success in dealing with t.hese dhilciren because they are especially prepared to do that.. I think it is-I kimow it is fair to say Temple University has never produced a specialist in urban education and I think it is probably fair to say that no uni- versity has until very, very recently. When we graduate these NTC corpsmen w'e will have produced the first describable commodities in this area. That is to say we will have produced specialists in urban educat.ion. This seems t.o me to be entirely the most significant. of NTC from our point of view as a college of education. I too could regale you about. stories of what happens in the class- room and what. fine work these men do. I know you have heard a lot of that. All I can say is, it is true. It has the ring of truth to me because we see it all the time. I would like to concentra.te only by telling you what. NTC has done far beyond the small t.rickle of money that. has supported it is to give us an opportunity to add new dimensions t.o teacher education in pro- ducing a specialist in urban education and to a question asked earlier of the group of Atlanta, what would happen if the trickle stopped for NTC~ `Well, I think what would happen is that one way or another Philadelphia and Temple Universit.y and some other kinds of resources would keep something like this going. It would not be as big and probably not as good but we would keep something like this going because having had a. measure of success we probably would not give it up. I should really stop because I am eager to hear your questions and see what responses I can make rat.her than hearing myself say the same thing about NTC to people who started out as unbelievers and who have come around to now believing how effective this program is. Mr. BRADEMAS. Thank you for a most valuable statement. I want to make a general statement and invite any comment you may wish to make upon it. I have sat in these hearings now almost every day and PAGENO="0506" 132S ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS heard questions and answers raised of witnesses about the Teacher Corps and I have come up with about. four or five general conclusions from all of this test ilnony. The first. is that there has been expressed, at. least to our committee, 110 signiticant opposition to the Teacher Corps by schoolteachers in the communities in which the corpsmen teach, by school principals, or by school superintendents, or by the chief State school officers of the States in which Teacher Corps interns are teaching. The second general conclusion I have reached from listening to this testimony is that there has been no significant evidence presented to our committee of Federal control over the operation of the Teacher Corpsat the local level. The local school systems are controlling the program. The third conclusion I have reached is that the school systems in which the Teacher Corps men and women are teaching aiid learning a great deal from t lie Teacher Corps operation. The fourth conclusion I have reached is that. the operation of the Teacher Corps to date while it has been relatively modest with only 1,200 or so has had the effect of dramatically focusing attention on the very grave problem of providing and retaining teachers for the dis- advantaged in the areas of poverty. The last conclusion that. I have reached is that the two principal criticisms of the Teacher Corps (at least as adduced by the testimony before us) is that the funding of the Teacher Corps has been delayed too much and that the 1)001 of Teacher (`orps interns, the authorized pool of Teacher Corps interns, has been too small, that you need more. Now, in light, of your experience, would you shoot down. or modify, or change, any of those conclusions? I am trying to give you the major conclusions I have arrived at after listening to the. evidence. I am not talking about speculations. I am talking about the evidence that. has been brought before this committee during these. hearings. Mr. WILSON. I would like to respond by agreeing with you on your observations. I think these are all true. I think the six observations, generalizations that you have might be the same one Dr. Osview and I have been trying to make, and that is t.here has been a change in the education of teachers and we are developing a new breed, we are devel- oping specialists who have this commitment and I think we need to underline the commitment to work in the disadvantaged areas. Mr. Osvmw. I would like to say we are now in the position of being able to capitalize on some experience. I note with grave disappoint- ment that some of the suggestions for amending seem to me to run directly counter to what seems in our experience to be the great strength or at least the great emerging strengths of NTC. For one thing, I cannot. believe that you can tack on a single year of education and make this program just as good as it otherwise would be. I might. say that the program we developed at Temple Tniversity is our program and we worked it out with the school district of Philadelphia. It is not a national program and we think that is one of its strengths. It is a 51-hour program. It demands a fantastic amount. of work out of these students and I think it is to our shame and dismay we are just. now understanding how hard our students can work. PAGENO="0507" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDL~CATION AMENDMENTS 1329 We never made our students work this hard befoie and we are get- jug much better results. W~e have, to recognize you cannot do more than `2 yeais work in one. I am also unhappy about the fact. that this artificial limitation of $75 plus $15 per dependent is going to be tacked on. I cannot for the life of me understand why. It is an eternal mystery to me why anyone would oppose the willingness, the eagerness of the city school systems to be paying these people at the rate of a beginning teacher's salary. It just. so happens I rode omi the airplane to Dallas on Tuesday morning with the. superintendent, of schools from Philadelphia. He had not been aware of the fact that this was a potential amendment. When I told him of the limitation of $75 he asked me for perhaps 100 miles as the airplane flies to be sure he had gotten the informa- t.ion from me and I took out this document that. I had and showed it. to him finally because it. was apparent he thought. I was making some kind of mistake in communicating to him. his point of view would he. exactly mine, that these people earn a beginning teacher's salary and should be paid a beginning teacher's sala iv. I t)mink anothe.r point that. needs to he emphasized is that we. have an opportunity now due to the very large number of people who are willing to apply for NTC out of which we make this very small selec- tion. I might say NTC was not really well organized to do this job initially and would be much l)etter organized now, we are losing the opportunity to really bring in the cream of the people. with missionar zeal for tli ~S 11)1) by putting an artificial limitation. It is still a fact that the No. 1 problem in American education toda is a teacher shortage. None of the devices ever mentioned in either the Sunday supplement kinds of things one rends about education or in any of the hooks has ever discovered a way to do without the teacher. We will continue to need more teachers and as we get more machines, we will need more. teachers even as we begin to get more computers in education. No matter what the device is it comes down to the fact that the No. 1 problem in time Fnited States today is teacher shortage. how we can stint on the genuine attack on the general teacher shortage problem is more than I can understand. T have never heard it adequately explained to me why there should be stinting on that. and I simply cannot figure out for the life of me wily NTC has to be embattled for its very life and why these hearings should not. he concerned with how to put many millions of dollars in addition to what has been considered a reasonable level of support. ~\Ir. Form. Both of you gentlemen are concerned with the training of teachers and are ai)le to observe this program from a little, different point, of view than the school superintendent out here facing the day- to-clay pressures that almost always overwhelm them to the point of where they have very little opl)ortunitv to move in new dli lections. One of the things that disturbs me a little Lit as we watch the progress of these progranis is that as they start to expand the coin- petition for the really good people sets in. Time que~tioii comes to mind as to how we keep this talent. as we. develop it in time. id~ice in the sc] iool svsteii wi ejy ii is I ikelv 1 o (olitinmie to (10 the most good. PAGENO="0508" 1330 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS What usually happens in the school system? They are all growing, they are all expanding. Every time a man comes along who shows any interest beyond the subject matter-this is true in my area at least-t.ha.t he is teaching on a daily basis, who shows any community awareness, the first thing you know they have him involved in some- thing. About the time he starts to slio~ leadership they make him a subprincipal or something of the kind and lie gets bogged down with all of the problems of how to get somebody a seat on Monday morning and t.hmgs of that nature and lie can no longer work in this area. What do you have, in mind as a followup in the. school system to provide a continued recognition after this person is no longer a corps- man of his being something special and functioning in a special part of the school so that the special schools and special commitment are not lost. A State says, I believe my State says if a child is in school 265 days a year he is educated 1 year. That becomes the controlling consideration of everyone running the. school on a day-to-day basis. How do we stop that happening with these people? Mr. OSVIEW. I would not~ denegate education of principals. We need educated principals and superintendents, too. I happen to come out of a school of discipline of administration and I know how un- port ant it is and how bad it. has usually been. So if some of these people in the National Teacher Corps become prmcipals and I will freely predict to you many of them will, be- cause they a.re goodl l)eoPle, I don't find that bad. I find that good. Your other questions lead us into a very consideration tha.t I would like t.o take a few minutes to point out if I may. Not just National Teacher Corps alone but the galaxy of Federal programs is accom- plishing some things which I don't guess was ever really in the mind of Congress or certainly was never said in so many words and it sur- prised a. lot of us w-ho were longtime observers of the educational theme. School systems have not spent any time on money and planning recently. If they w-ere up to date as of today or maybe had some reasonable idea as to what. was going to happen tomorrow, that was usually enough. One of the things that Federal money is now be- ginning to do is make planning a part of school system operation in ways that 2 years ago I would have argued probably would never happen. One of the kinds of evidence I se.e of this plamiing is the sort of thing tha.t is happening in Philadelphia where there is a plan- ning committee made up of people within and without the school system. One of the things we have discussed in Philadelphia is to create new categories of teachers rewarded with special pay and other kinds of recognition. There is some little question as to whether we are going to call them the old fashion terms master teachers or call them specialists. Right. now I think w-e are pret.ty much agreed on the specialist category. We are. going to try to find a way in the Philadelphia school system t.o reward these people who are especially good because long ago we rejected the idea of combat pay. I might say the combat pay rejection was led bx~ the teacher union. It was proposed by the administration which it turned out was some decade or so behind the hinging of the teachers on this issue. PAGENO="0509" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1331 Mr. FORD. That is about par. Mr. OsvIEw. Probably about par. Mr. BRADEMAS. I want to be sure everyone has a chance to be heard. Mr. ERLENBORN. It seems you have made the observation that in the last year since we have had the National Teacher Corps we have begun to educate and graduate our first specialists in urban educa- tion. My question to you is Where have the educators been all these years that now is only the first time it is being done? Mr. OsvrFw. `I have only been in education 30 years and I have only been with a teacher education institution for 14 and that is too little time to give you an answer to your question because, as Paul Moore pointed out. almost 20 years ago, the typical lab in public school systems is about 50 years from the beginning of a good practice until it is pretty well disseminated and diffused throughout the public schools in the United States. While he did not measure it exactly, he estimated the lag in the teacher education institutions was approximately 100 years. I do not say this lightly. I say this with chagrin but I say it as a truth. Teacher education institutions do lag behind and they lag behind for some profoundly important reasons, the most significant of which is the teacher education institutions have always been lowest down on the stick when it came to getting money. The second fact is that teacher education institutions respond to demand. They do not supply and then hope that their supply will somehow be higher. They respond to demand. The fact is that until public school systems began to see a need for specialists in urban edu- cation the teachers colleges, the schools of education, the colleges of education had no need to which to respond. I think maybe we are speeding up this process of diffusion, of good ideas a little more now with a little outside money because from our point of view NTC is the support for ideas which we have long held but have never been able to bring to that maturity. I think that is the answer basically to your question, sir. Mr. ERLENBORN. Is it true then that the creation of the Teachers Corps is what made the urban schools aware of the need? Prior to that time there was no need and, therefore, they didn't ask you to edu- cate people in that specialty? Mr. OSVTEW. I would not say NTC began it. but whatever term you may give it, the recognition by the National Government. primarily through the Office of the President on some of the kinds of problems that were beginning to burgeon outside some of the cities. Within the city, we have long know of the problems existing in the urban com- munity but a noneducator but yet one close to education, suc.h as Dr. Conant., was able to talk about the educational and other kinds of problems that were exploding in the intercity. I think we have had the recognition. It is a matter of means. It is a matter of where- withal. WTe have even had the ideas but there is a long step between a professor's thinking up an idea or 1 eognizing a problem to where he put it into practice in a program for educating teachers. The thing that moves it is money. Money is the mode of power. Mr. ERLEXBORX. It occurs to me you have. had this ability j~ the past. You did not develop this ability ill the past year because, as PAGENO="0510" 1332 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS von sug~est. YOU did not I ecch 1)~~)Pi~ to heconic specialist~ in ;~fl ~l1'E~l where there is no dennnnl. so ol)ViOlI5lV the. demand was there. This was not created 1 ~v the ~ational Teacher Corps either. So what it comes down to basically is the ilI)Pl i(atlOfl ot these warm, green Federal funds. Mr. Osvirw. I like your phrase. and I would agree with you on that. Mr. WILSON. WolIl(l YOU not. also say the problem of urbanization is a recent one md the problems created have, now been primarily tocu~ed on the schools? The problems may have, been there all the time hut because of the intenseness to do something has focused our chan~te in teacher education. Mr. Eimrxnonx. Let me make one last observation on one of your comments-the combat pay-afl(l it seems to me. we have this element of conihat pay. I would say this is not necessarily the proper term, but. this is what the Teacher Corps is calling it. We have the ability of the student with his own finances to go into the same sort of teach- ing courses. get. educational expertise and become a specialist in urban education, hut we are offering the attraction of the additional pay of the Teachers Corps to get these people. in. If this absolutely neces sarv? Are these people a different breed ? Do they stand apart from the one who is piTying his own way for education and should we. set them apart? Mr. OsviEw. Let me give. you an illustration to answer the question as well as I can. \Ve have had operating at Temple Fniversity what other colleges call ~sL\T. We started ours about P2 years or so ago with a. ~rant from the Ford Foundation, and we have continued it. since with our own funds. Around the college we call this a way of reclaiming liberal arts graduates and making productive teachers ou~ of them. which I think is a fair repre~entation of how we really feel about it. This is a 36-hour program. There is no support for the student beyond the. support that he gets as a practicing teacher in the school, being paid by the school district at. a beginning teacher's salary. We. have put a lot of teachers-we gra(llIate about 100 a year-with liberal arts degrees who have become teachers into the schools and we have not been able to get over the hump of putting these teachers into the hard inner corps schools, the intercity schools. They were free in any case to go to an school that wanted to hire. them. A lot, of them went into Philadelphia but. a. lot of them didn't. go into Phila- delphia also. The thing about XTC is they are recruited to do a job and a tough job. J~f you want to use combat. pay for that., I would not argue with von beeause semantics do not seem to be that important. With XTC we have recruited people for a. special job. We say to them, "IVe know it is a tough JOI). a rough job, and we know there. are lots of easier ways to get an M.X. than taking 36 hours. So, in return for that. there is a little stipend~ you will starve a little, but von will work 67 hours a week i'ather than 37 hours. but you will ~et eimu~h to get by on." It `is possible for us to turn out some people who w~hl find their futures in these inner city schools, and that. is what makes tile dif- ference. and it is as simple, as that. PAGENO="0511" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1333 Mr. BRAI)EMAS. The Chair wants to observe that we have one more witness before we break for lunch, and if Mrs. Berkman would come forward we~ would he pleased to hear from her. I)i'. Wilson and 1)r. Osview, we want to thank you for your appear- ance here today and giving us your views. At this point I would ask unanimous consent to have inserted in the record a statement from the American Parents Committee, Inc. (The statement follows:) STATEMENT OF THE AMERICAN PARENTS C0MMIrrER, INC. The American Parents Committee appreciates this opportunity to have our statement included in the record of hearings on the proposed Elementary and Secondary Education Amendments of 1967. As a non-partisan, non-profit national organization which has devoted its twenty years of existence solely to support of Federal legislation for children, the American Parents Committee has supported provisions of the original Elementary and secondary Education Act of 1965. Our Board of Directors and National Council, comprised of over 100 nationally recognized leaders in child health, education and welfare, have also endorsed support of the Act's following amendments NATIONAL TEACHER CORPS Although previously included in Higher Education legislation, the National Teacher Corps concept has now been more logically incorporated as a part of the Elementary and Secondary Education bill. Other changes in the original concept include requiring state approval of a local school (listrict's request for volunteers, and permitting the local school system to reject any volunteer it finds unacceptable. Also, the salary pai(l to teacher-interns would be reduced below that now received as starting pay for teachers in the same district, These measures, we feel, will enhance the value of the Teacher Corps. lioth locally and nationally. Departmental testimony has already provided ample documentation of the nee(l for Teacher Corps assistance in deprived areas. An additional Point WO would like to emphasize, however, is the need of a "Fair Start" for 010 sl)ecial group of underprivileged children, who could be particularly benefitted through Teacher Corps services. This special group is the kindergarten age group of five-year olds. Many states in the past, and up to the present, have attempted to establish a state-wide system of public kindergartens-oiily to find the over-all costs too high. If the National Teacher Corps, without a categorical aid grant, could provide a substantial increase in the number of kindergarten teachers available in deprived areas, it would close the educational gap now existing between the initial benefit of Head Start programs and the first available grade in puhlic school, for those areas. COMPREHENSIVE EDFCATIONAI. PlANNING The need of such a "Fair Start" for five-year-aIds may well be further do('u- mented through such studies as this planning section provides. Certainly. i~reater coordination among local, state, and federal educational agencies is needed to insure the best possible use of the public's tax (lollar. The Anieric:in Parents Committee heartily endorses this provision, with the understanding that niaxi- mutii control will continue to rest at the State and lo(a I level ~f e~1uca t ional pta niiing. VOCATIONAL EDFCATION GRANTS To ((nat-er the present tide of over one million school droji-outs, tie develop- men t of additional vocational education t rogritnis at the s (sa!iia rv 1 \(`l alters pra('tical encouragement- to such students. We W mId ho1s'. Ii w'vcr. that I his dev'lopment will not ultimately lead to early and rigid (las'o P tin of all students as either "vocational" or "college material." with senar:lt( institutions for Olch classification. Some distinguished critics of our secondary schools liavc' in fact advoated this, citing the English system of giving written exaiiinatins ti all h1-v'ar-olds to PAGENO="0512" 1334 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS determine their placement in either vocational schools or college-oriented see- on(Iary schools. We would suggest that such early classification completely overlooks the "late-blooming" quality of many young students. Also, we believe that the widest practicable choice of courses, under the same secondary-school roof, provides the best means of developing the individual potential of all our American youth. HANDICAPPED CHILDREN The American Parents Committee, at its November 1966 Board of Directors meeting, unanimously approved support of Title VI of the 1965 Act, providing special educational programs for the handicapped child, and also the establish- ment of a model secondary school for deaf children at Gallaudet College in Washington. D.C. In other legislation now being considered by the 90th Con- gress, we have already recorded our support of programs for early identification and treatment of the handicapping illnesses of children. Surely the education of those already handicapped deserves no less consideration. For this reason, we strongly support authorization of $1 million for fiscal year 1968, for recruit- ment of personnel to work with handicapped children. MISCELLANE0t S AMENDMENTS The American Parents Committee wishes to record our continued support of expanded educational programs for Indian children; for overseas dependents' schools: and extension of Public Laws 815 and 874, providing assistance to schools damaged or destroyed by national disasters. Implementation of all the above proposals. we are convinced, will make invalu- able contributions to the quality of future generations of Americans. Respectfully submitted. BARBARA D. MCGARRY, E~recntive Director, American Parents Comimittee. Mr. BRADEMAS. Mrs. Bergman, we are grateful to you for coming, we are sorry that von had to wait so long, but as you have seen, we have many witnesses. The bells are ringing now and we will have to leave very shortly. If you would like to summarize your statement, we can place the full statement in the record. STATEMENT OF MRS. LEWIS J'. BERGMAN, CITIZENS SCHOOLS COMMITTEE OF CHICAGO Mrs. BERGMAN. Mr. Chairman, my statement is very brief and it would be quicker for me. to read it than to try to summarize it. I am Mrs. Lewis ,J. Bergman, a member of the Board of Directors of the Citizens Schools Committee of Chicago. This organization was founded in 1933 and has been working con- tinuously to assist in the improvement of public education. WTe are nonpartisan, nonpolitical, nonprofit, and our membership is composed of individuals and civic organizations throughout the metropolitan area. In our 34 years we have, worked on many educational problems and studied many programs. One of those that we have studied recently is the National Teachers Corps, and our approval of it is so great that we have only one regret: that is that we did not invent it our- selves. The Chicago National Teacher Corps Consortium on Cultural Dis- advantagement was organized in the spring of 1966. Its members are three universities and three teachers' colleges. They performed the stupendous task of assembling a faculty and administrative staff, pre- paring a program, and providing intensive and extensive training for PAGENO="0513" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1335 interns and teacher leaders before the public schools opened in Sep- tember. More important than the magnitude of the task was its success. Thanks to the National Teachers Corps, Chicago has the services of a group of young college graduates who not only want to teach but who want to teach in those schools that many teachers shun. There are young people who are more interested in service than in prestige or affluence and who do not regard teaching as a 9 o'clock to 3 :15, 5-day-a-week job but one that extends far beyond the school- hours and the physical limits of the schoolhouse. During their preservice training last summer, the interns combined academic studies with teaching in Chicago's summer schools and get- ting to know the people and problems of the inner city. Now these in- terns and their leaders are demonstrating the effectiveness of this train- ing. They know that children don't understand their teachers unless the teachers understand the children, and the teachers can't understand the children without understanding the families and the communities from which they come. In the short time since the Chicago interns started their training, they have learned much about the language and the mores of the slums and have gained enough insight and ac- ceptance by the community to organize and participate in some of its activities. It seems obvious that this approach must affect improve- ments in schools where it is applied and that it can also permeate the whole school system and lead to many new techniques. Interns are now assisting teachers, helping to plan programs in the schools to which they are assigned, and doing tutoring that not only raises a child's grade level, but also raises the level of his self-respect and his chance for greater accomplishment. One Teacher Corps team has taken on the additional task of teaching modern mathematics to adults in a public housing project adjacent to the school. Another team is working with a group of college students who were having trouble with their studies and had become members of a gang. Not all the work is so dramatic but it is proceeding with vigor and skill in the day-to-day job of helping children who are in dire need of help. The citizens schools committee believes that the National Teacher Corps has attracted superior young people, many of whom would never have entered the teaching profession if they had not been given the opportunity to perform a significant. service. And now when they complete their training and are ready for assignment. as regular class- room teachers they will already have had 2 years of invaluable ex- perience. Unlike many beginning teachers, they will not be shocked and appalled by the prospect of teaching in an inner city school but will have the confidence that. results from knowledge and practice. They will not be inclined to resign or to ask for a transfer at the first, possible .moment since they know the worst-and the best-of their job and it is the job that they want to do. Teacher Corps teams are now operating to the satisfaction of the principals and the teacher whom they assist., in 16 Chicago elementary schools. These schools were selected by the board of education because they had the greatest concentration of ADC mothers and families whose annual income was no more than $2,000. The citizens schools committee greatly appreciates what the National Teacher Corps is 75-492-G7--pt. 2-33 PAGENO="0514" 1336 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLCATION AMENDMENTS loi1n~. \Ve ale IlY oiilv that there aren't enough interns and leaders to go aroimd. Sixteen out of ~46 Chicago schools in impoverished areas leaves ~3O that could benefit by the work of the corpsmen and the expert. accredited teachers that they will become. We need a constant supply of teachers in whom enthusiasm and sensitivity are combined with specialized training in the skills that are essential for work in our inner city schools. We don't expect the Na- tional Teacher Corps alone to change the course of history but we are convinced that it. can change the court of many unhappy young lives and greatly assist in the development of useful citizens. Mr. BRADEMAS. Thank you very much, Mrs. Bergman, for that ex- cellent statement. It occurs to me as I listen to your statement that. your experience in Chicago with the Teacher Corps would in no serious way invalidate the general conclusions you may have heard me observe a few moments ago. Mrs. BERGMAN. Not in any way, that is correct. Mr. BRADEMAS. How many Teacher Corps teams do you have? Mrs. BERGMAN. IVe have 16 teams in 16 schools, 58 interns and 16 teacher leaders. In addition, there are two teams working in one of the Chicago suburbs. They consist. of two team leaders and eight interns. i\Ir. BRADEMAS. WTith what institutions of higher learning are the teachers working? Mrs. BERGMAN. Roosevelt, Loyola, St. Paul, Teachers College North, and Teachers College South. Mr. BRADEMAS. Have you had any difficulty with the attitudes of schoolteachers in the system toward the Teacher Corps interns? Mrs. BERGMAN. Initially there was some resistance. Any change is likely to produce that. There are some qualms but since this corps has been operating it has practically disappeared. The principals are de- lighted and the teachers who were once fearful have found they are getting great assistance from these young interns who take youngsters out of overcrowded classrooms and take them to any little nook in the school done enormous good and improved the whole tenor of the class- room. Mr. BRADEMAS. You say you have 58 interns. Would you happen to know if most of them are from the Chicago area or other parts (~f the country? Mrs. BERGMAN. Most of them are from the Chicago area. Most are from the Middlewest., a few not from Chicago. Those trained by the consortium last summer, 16 went to Cincinnati and Minneapolis but 1 think they came from those areas. Mr. BRADEMAS. Have you had any problem with respect to the delay in funding the program in terms of setting up your Teacher Corps operation? Mrs. BERGMAN. That was one of the big obstacles. A number of them dropped out because of the uncertainty of their future. They simply couldn't. wait. The program didn't. start until November. Teachers expected to get in September and couldn't afford to wait. Mr. BRADEMAS. WThat about Federal interference with the Teacher Corps as operated in Chicago? ~\Irs. BERGMAN. To my knowledge, there has been absolutely none. The program is run entirely by the school system. The schools were PAGENO="0515" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTJCATION AMENDMENTS 1337 selet~ted by the hoard of education, the superintendent. The programs are 1)1an1~ed school by school by the principals and the teaclier~ and as far as I know it is purely a local operation. \lr. BRADEMAS. Thank you very much, indeed, Mrs. Bergman, for your excellent statement and testimony. WTe appreciate very much your coming and I shall assure you I will draw to the attention of the distinguished member of this committee from Chicago, Mr. Pucinski, your useful contribution to our testimony. The Chair would like to observe that because Dean Sizer was un- able to get his plane in we shall not meet this afterriooii and we shall adjourn imtil tomorrow at 9 :30 when we will hear testimony from a number of education associations and other organizations. We are now adjourned. (Whereupon, at 12 :30 the committee recessed to reconvene at 1 :3() a.m., Friday, March 17, 1967.) PAGENO="0516" PAGENO="0517" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS OF 1967 FRIDAY, MARCH 17, 1967 HOTJSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITrEE ON EDUCATION ~1) LABOR, Washington, D.C. The committee met at 9 :30 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Carl D. Perkins (chairman of the committee) presiding. Present: Representatives Perkins, Green, Ford, Meeds, Ayres, Scherle, Dellenback, Gardner, and Steiger. Staff members present: Robert E. McCord, senior specialist; H. D. Reed, Jr., general counsel; `William D. Gaul, associate general coun- sel; Benjamin F. Reeves, editor; Louise M. Dargans, research assistant; and Charles W. Radcliffe, special education counsel for minority. Chairman PERKINS. The committee will come to order. A quorum is present. We have with us this morning several panels and several witnesses. The AFL-CIO representatives are here but they will be within approximately 10 minutes so we will withhold questions until all of the witnesses have had a chance to make their general state- ments. I am going to call on the National Federation of the Blind, Prof. John F. Nagle. Would you come forward, Mr. Nagle? We would he pleased to hear your statement at the present time. I feel, like many others, that we have neglected, more or less, the blind in the past in enacting legislation here of a minimum nature for several years. I feel, like many others on this committee, tha.t legislation should be greatly expanded and we are delighted to welcome you here, Mr. Nagle, and you may proceed. STATEMENT OF J~OHN F. NAGLE, CHIEF, WASHINGTON OFFICE, NATIONAL FEDERATION OF TEE BLIND Mr. NAGLE. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is John F. Nagle. I am chief of t.he Washington office of the Na- tional Federation of the Blind. My address is 1908 Q Street NW, Washington, D.C. 20009. Provided with adequate training in the skills that have been devised to appreciably reduce, or even to en- tirely eliminate, the limitations of his disability-and along with this basic and most necessary preparation, provided with the same general education available to others, followed by further education in a spe- cialized field of interest and aptitude-and most important of all, 1339 PAGENO="0518" 1340 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS provided wjtli a sound and sensible understanding, not only of the restlidtions of his disability, but of the possibilities still available to hint in Spite of his inipairment-provided with all this, Mr. Chairman, the bluid person, the physically disabled persoll, is equipped to live a successful, self-dependent, contributory life. Denied all this, Mr. (`iiairman, untutored in the tecimiques of independent travel, the blind ~)e1soii is chained to a chair or the arm of his sighted family and friends. Untrained in the competent use of braille, the blind person is illiterate, and cannot even record a telephone number or read a grocery list. Denied the chance to share in the educational opportunities avail- able to others, the physically impaired iei~oil remains igilorant of the wisdom and the knowledge and the experience of the ages, his intellect is untapped, his abilities and talents undeveloped and his possibilities of living a worthwhile life unrealizable. Denied a sound and sensible understanding of his impairment, its restrictions and limitations, the problems afl(l perplexities which it imposes upon him, the limitless possibilities of achievement still open to him-denied this philosopluc orientation the blind person, the physically (lisaJ)led person, will stagnate and smother beneath the fallacies and nlisconceptions of the past-ancl of the preseiit--~uid he will become as helpless and as hopeless as he believes he is. ~\[r. Chairman, the foregoing are not just exaggerated and overly (lranlatic phrases, empty of meaning, divested of reality, they are an attempt to make this committee and the Congress understand the plight of the handicapped, the possibilities of the handicapped. And the~ (lescriptions that are give above are an effort to express tile experiences of thousands and thousands of blind people, of physically (lisabledi men and wonien-some of whom live successful, independent lives, while others live dependently; live futile, despairing lives. Tocla, Mr. Chairman, properly trained and equipped, the blind person, the physically disabled person, has a more nearly equal chance to function constructively and fully in our society. Improperly trained, inadequately equipped, or not tramed or equipped at all, the blind person, the phvsicafly disabled person, is a nonparticipating spectator of life, just as he was 500 years ago. Mr. Chairnmn. the ~ational Federation of the Blind vigorously and unequivocally endorses and supports tile provisions of 1-I.R. 6~3O to strengthen, broaden, and improve federally financed educational pro- grams for handicapped children. Specifically, Mr. Chairman, we support section 151 of H.R. 6230- winch would establish regional resource centers, to provide testing and evaluation services to determine whether a child is really physically or mentally handicapped, to accurately ascertain the nature and the extent of tile handicapping condition or conditions, to correctly diag- nose the special educational needs of single or multihiandicapped cinidren. to (levelop programs to meet these needs, to further and advance the development, of special education programs in the schools, agencies. and institutions in their respective regions. Is there a nee(i for such regional resource centers, Mr. Chairman? PAGENO="0519" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1341 Over the past ~ years, I have shared the unhappy experience of par- ents of a 3-year-old girl, who may have, a serlous visual impairment, or she may not sometimes she acts as thou h she can see ((insIder- ably, and at other tililes as thou~li ~1ie cannot see it all. This little girl may ~ nientaflv ret aided or she may not be retarded at all-she will accurately repeat what is said to her, but she seldom initiates an idea, or responds to a question with the expected answer. This little girl may be severely crippled in her legs or physically weakened in some other way, although no crippling condition is ap- parent-still, though the. little girl is more. than 3 years old, she crawls from place to l)lace-she has never taken a step unaided. The little girl I speak of and her family live. here. in the Washington area. I am familiar with the sad search i iurs of the little girl's parents for answers, for intelligent, informed hel j with the difficulties of their unfortunate child. I am acquainted with their fruitless task of trek from doctor to clinic to hospital to institution-but their questions remain un- answered; the little girl remains unhelped in her desperate need. ~\Ir. Chairnian. the ~\ational Federation of the Blind endorses and supports section l~2 of H.R. t23() which is directed toward increasing the number of persons entering the field of special education-as teach- ers, psychologists, therapists, social case workers. research specialists. It is not merely enough to (letermme the educational needs of handicapped children, to devise educational programs. to develop specially-required tools and equ i pmeiit, ii civ n let hods and ingenious techniques- For all this will be lost, waste(l. and unavailable in the. education of the handicapped children if teachers ~n substantial numbers, if Sup- portive. personnel in all specialties. cannot be induced to prepare for entry into the special education field, cannot be pei'siiaded to seek em- plovment in special education programs once they have acquired the requisite training. Section 152 of H.R. 6230 as Federal law, will make it possil)le to accelerate and expand present efforts to recruit, college and university students, general education teachers, and other general education spe- cialists to enter the special education field. The National Federation of the Bi mci endorses and supports section Th5 of T-I.R. E~230. to include Interior Department operated schools for Indian children, and Defense De1)artment operated schools for over- sea.s dependents within the scope and benefits of title. VT of the Ele- me.ntary an(l Secondary Education Act. It is our belief, Mr. Chairman, that physically and nientallv de- fective Indian children, that. physically and mentally defective chil- dren of military and Defense. Department civilian pei'sonnel stationed at. bases outside of the United States, have the same right to receive and accordingly should receive the same equality of educational oppor- tunity provided through special education programs available and afforded to American children resident in the FnitecI States. The National Federation of t.he Blind endorses and support.s sec- tion 156 of I-I.R. 6230, to expand existing inst.ruct.iona.l media pro- grams to include all handicapped children. PAGENO="0520" 1342 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDME~f.S By authorizing the conducting of research in the use of educational media-by serving to stimulate, encourage. and promote the discovery and devising of new and better instructional instruments, tools, equip~ ment., and apparatus-by authorizing the production and distribution of educational media for the use and benefit. of handicapped children and adults-by authorizing the training of persons in the use of edu- cational media for the instruction of the handicapped, and in the use of the newly devised and developed educational instruments, tools, equipment. and apparatus-by making all of this possible, Mr. Chair- man. section 156 of H.R. 6230, as Federal law, should result in greatly improved educational progress and programs for the handicapped- for physically and mentally defective children and adults-it should result in greatly advancing and equalizing their educational oppor- t unities. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, vis- mdlv impaired children, children with hearing difficulties, children wjth malformed limbs, the mentally retarded, the emotionally dis- turbed, each disability grouping of children presents uniquely differ- ent. categories of problems and special needs, problems to be resolved, special needs to he met and satisfied, by specially trained and qualified tea chers an ci supportive personnel. Adequately educated and equipped by these specialists, many dis- abled children will (levelop into self-sufficient adults. Properly prepared to cope. with life under adverse circumstances all disabled children will be able t.o live fuller lives. President Kennedy once said, in connection with a pending medicare bill, that a nation is judged by the care and considerat.ion it shows its elderly citizens. But even more. Mr. Chairman, I believe a nation should be judged on the extent to which it assures equality of opportunity to its children macic unequal by physical and mental impairment. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PmKIxs. Thank you very much, Mr. Nagle. We appre- ciate your appearance here this morning. You have made a most elo- quent statement. I am most hopeful that we will be able to follow some of your suggest.ions. Before we get int.o questioning, I notice the first witnesses here this morning are Andrew Biemiller and Carl J. Megel of the American Federation of Labor. Do you have any other people with you, Mr. Biemiller? Mr. BIEMILLER. Yes, I do, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Let me state for the record that I dou.bt whether there is a Member in the Congress in or out of Congress who has been a more diligent advocate of Federal aid to education over the past 20 years than Andrew Biemiller. I make this statement inasmuch as I served with him in the 81st Congress and know of his good work in the 81st Congress on behalf of the. Federal aid to education and the old Ta.ft bill, which had passed the Senate and was before the House Committee on Education and Labor in 1949. Andrew Biemiller was most helpful in trying to get that legislation to the floor on that occasion and he was trying to get legislation through PAGENO="0521" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTJCATION AMENDMENTS 1343 the Congress also through the 80th Congress. In every successive Congress since the 81st all through the years he has come before this committee repeatedly urging the Committee on Education and Labor to approve Federal aid to education. I doubt t.hat anyone is more familiar with the obstacles that we have been confronted with over a period of years than Andrew Biemiller, and I am delighted to welcome him here. this morning, and I am like- wise delighted to welcome here Carl Megal of the American Feclera- tion of Teachers. Both of these distinguished gentlemen have appeared before our committee frequently when we were writing the Elementary and Secondary Act of 1965 to give us the benefit of their views. Mr. Biemiller, do you want to introduce anyone who is with you today, and you may proceed in any way you care to. STATEMENT OF ANDREW J. BIEMILLER, THE AMERICAN FEDERA- TION OF LABOR & CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS, ACCOMPANIED BY WALTER DAVIS, DIRECTOR OF THE AFL-CIO DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION; AND JACK SESSIONS, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF THE AFL-CIO DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, AND A MEMBER OF THE SCHOOL BOARD OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Mr. BIEMILLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your kind and gen- erous remarks. I am accompanied by Mr. Walter Davis on my imme- diate right, director of the AFL-CIO Department of Education. He succeeded Mr. Rogen, whom you will remember has been here in past years. Mr. Rogen accepted a position at American University. Further to the right is Mr. Jack Sessions, who is an assistant director of our department of education and a member of the School Board of the District of Columbia. I trust as the dialog develops that they may be permitted to participate at an appropriate time. Mr. Chairman, my name is Andrew J. Biemiller. I am the director of the AFL-CIO Department of Legislation. The American Federation of Labor & Congress of Industrial Orga- nizations is pleased to have this oj)portunity to meet then with this committee, to pay testimony to the significant benefits which the Ele- mentary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 has brought to millions of America's children and young people, and to discuss the various amendments to that act proposed in H.R. 6230. We are proud to have played a major part in shaping the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and in helping to secure its passage. In every part of the Nation, this Federal support is being used to bring new educational opportunities to the children who most need them, the children from low-income families who must have excellence in educa- tion if they are to break out of the poverty cycle which has entrapped their families, in many cases for several generations. Other features of this measure have placed books in previously empty school libraries, financed innovative educational courses and programs, and strengthened the support for long needed educational research. Experience has shown that there is need for improvement and ex- tension of the original legislation, but this should in no way detract PAGENO="0522" 1344 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS from the fact that the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 has brought to millions of America's children and young people, and to discuss the various amendments to that act proposed in H.R. 6230. Wre feel that the. Congress, if it were to appropriate less than the full authorization under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, would do an injustice to the wisdom and vision of this committee. This committee carefully studied the needs of our Nation's schools and based the authorizations in the act upon those needs. W'e con- gratulate the committee for the excellent job it. did. The proposed authorization for fiscal yea.r 1968 is more than $1.5 billion under the present authorization. The requested appropriation for title I is only 49 percent of the full authorization and for title III, which has clone so much to stimulate new and innovative educational programs, the proposed appropriation is only 47 percei~t of the full authorization. There are also substantial differences between the fiscal year 1968 authorizations and appropriation requests under titles II, school library resources and textbooks, and V, strengthening State depart- ments of education. The AFL-CIO is deeply concerned over the clear possibility that. the Elementary and Secondary Education Act will not. be adequately funded. Any congressional action appropriating funds below the au- tho~ized amounts will severely damage State and local programs now underway or just getting out of the planning stages. W~e. are convinced that the great breakthrough in the. educational field accomplished by the 89th Congress received overwhelming sup- port. from the. American people. The enactment of Public Law 89-10 brought with it. the promise of new educational opportunities for our youth. For the 90th Congress to appropriate less than half of authorized ESEA funds is to make a mockery of this promise and to destroy the hopes of those seeking to solve the complex problems in our present school system. The AFL-CIO is riot impressed with the argument, involving title I, that. under the fiscal year 1968 appropriation request, rio State will receive less money than it received in fiscal year 1967. First. of all, this Nation cannot afford to stand still on the educational front. Sec- ondlv, under this sug~estion. States will l.)e penalized for not using their full 1967 entitlement, even though they are now prepared to utilize such funds. Finally and perhaps most important, while the States themselves may not receive cuts. tIre same cannot be. said for local school districts. Application of the 1966 title I formula will require a reallocation within the State.s which, it appears to us, will necessitate fund cut- backs to fast-growing and already crowded suburban school districts. For all of these compelling reasons, the AFL-CIO cannot over- ~inphasize its conviction that the Elementary and Secondary Educa- tion Act must be fully funded. While we recognize that this committee. does not have jurisdiction in this area, the AFL-CIO strongly recommends that the House Education and Labor Committee past a resolution calling upon the PAGENO="0523" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1345 House Appropriations Committee to provide Federal funding to the full authorization permitted. We turn now to the specific amendments inchicled in 11.11. 6230. Title I of H.R. 6230 moves the National Teacher Corps from the Higher Education Act of 1965 wherein it is presently authorized to the Elementary and Secondary Act of 1965. We feel that the change is an appropriate one considering the central P~irPoSe of the legislation. The AFL-CIO was enthusiastic in its support of the legislation winch originally created the Teacher Corps. Now that we have seen the program in operation, even on a somewhat limited basis, we have every reason to reaffirm our original support. The Teacher Corps has been able to recruit able young people and to train them in techniques of reaching children in slum schools and poverty stricken rural areas. It has brought into the inner city schools something of the same spirit that the Peace Corps previously brought to underdeveloped areas in other parts of the world. The Teacher Corps has made these inner city schools a teaching challenge, rather than an ordeal to be avoided. To say this is in no way to reflect discredit upon the teachers who have long been working in the slum schools. Reports from many communities tell of the enthusiasm with which teachers have received the Teacher Corps interns. The 1)robleln which these teachers have wrest]ed with for so long have often seemed frustrating and hopeless. The Teacher Corps interns to bring to these situations a spirit of challenge and adventure and in most instances this spirit has proved so contagious as to infect the teachers around them with new hope and determination. Because. the Teacher Corps program inchide.s special teacher training in the colleges and universities near their assignment, an additional result of the program has been to stimulate these institutions of higher education to turn their attention with new vigor to the problems of training teachers in the special problems of inner city schools and im- poverished rural areas. This effect ha.s already had an influence far beyond the Teacher Corps interns themselves. The Teacher Corps gives promise of injecting new vitality into the schools and at. the same time maintaining the important principle of local control of education. The program is available only in those school systems which have specifically asked for it; the interns are assigned only subject to the approval of the specific individual by the school system; and the institutions of higher education which provide the training have the right to turn down individual interns. The school system has the right to make all assignments of interns, to make transfers, and to determine the. ~nhjet matter to be. taii~lct. rfhis is all in accord with local control of the sliool system. We therefore welcome the proposal in H.R. 6230 to place the Teacher Corps under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and to provide it with adequate financing. Also included in title I is a provision which would acid to title V of the Elementary and Seconda.ry Education Act funds for statewide educational planning. WTe believe that. in this proposal there is identified an important educational need. In a sense Congress has helped to create that need b the very actions which it li~is undertaken PAGENO="0524" 1346 ELEMENTARY A~D SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS to improve the educational opportunities of our Nation's children and young people. After years of stalemate on the issue of Federal aid to education. Congress began to meet. t.he problem by passing legislation designed to meet, specific and identifiable needs. The National Defense Education Act as first passed recognized a special national interest in the quality of teaching in science, mathe- matics, and foreign languages. As other national interests in specific subjects were identified, these subjects were added by amendments to the original act. Public Law 874 recognized the impact of federally affected areas and provided Federal assistance for the operation of schools in these areas. Public Law 815, dealing with the same type of problems, provided Federal funds for school construction. Provisions of the Civil Rights Act provide Federal assistance to schools attempting to eliminate segregation and its related problems. Many of the provisions of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 bear upon educational needs. Special legislation has been enacted to im- prove educational opportunity available to handicapped children. The Vocational Education Act of 1963 provides substantial Federal sup- port. in a field of major educational importance. We could go on at length extending the list, because recent Congresses have been extra- ordinarily productive in the field of educational legislation. We. believe that. in adopting this categorical approach, Congress made a wise decision. Yet in so doing Congress created a new need. If school systems are to make the best possible use of the funds avail- able to them under this wide variety of programs, they must undertake far more comprehensive planning than any in which they have prey- iously engaged. They must systematically identify their needs, organize them into a coherent pattern, and relate them to all of the available funds under existing Federal programs. Many school systems have had little experience with long-range planning and with the methods of obtaining grants. We are troubled by the extent to which many school systems have turned to private con- sulting first to help them obtain the grants that Congress meant them to have in the first place. The addition of Federal funds for educational planning will do much to help to meet this growing need. The proposed amendment involves a rather modest expenditure which will make possible the best use of the very substantial net expenditure which the Federal Government is now making in the field of education. We would like to suggest, however, that the committee give serious con~ideration to amending section 523(a) (1) to specifically name the State Departments of Education as the planning agency. It is t.he AFL-CIO's feeling that these departments are t.he appropriate agencies for carrying out the comprehensive statewide programs en- visioned under this part of the bill. In making this suggestion, the AFL-CIO is not proposing similar changes under other titles of the act, but. we do believe this proposal has merit under the "grants for comprehensive educational planning and evaluation" part of title V. Title I includes also a section providing assistance for the education of handicapped children. We are pleased to give our support to these important measures. The AFL-CIO has played an active part in improving opportunities for the handicapped. We have partici- PAGENO="0525" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDIJCATION AMENDMENTS 1347 pated energetically in the President's Committee on Employment of the Handicapped. We have made the resources of our collection of vocational films available to the captioned pictures for the deaf pro- gram. We played a leading role in the conference on vocational problems of the deaf which paved the way for the legislation estab- lishing the National Technical Institute for the Deaf. The regional centers, proposed in t.he bill, which would diagnose the educational needs of handicapped children and which would as- sist schools in meeting those needs could do much to help parents find appropriate schooling for handicapped children, a problem which is frustrating in many communities. The severe shortage of special teachers trained in the special needs of physically and mentally handicapped children lends particular im- port.anc.e to the provision in the bill for the recruitment of personnel for this work. And t.he rapid development of new educational tools and methods makes it especially timely to encourage emphasis upon developing educational media for handicapped children. In most school systems today there are significant. gaps. The schools simply cannot meet t.he needs of certain children because there are no facilities or teachers to deal with their special handicaps. This prob- lem is especially true of children with multiple handicaps. H.R. 6230 promises new hope for those children. Although H.R. 6230, in its present form, does not provide for the outright extension of Public Law 874 and Public Law 815, the im- pacted aid programs, Public Law 815 will expire on June 30, 1967, and we understand that this committee will be turning its attention to this matter. We urge the committee to propose extension of these laws which have contributed greatly to the improvement of educa- tion in many communities. WTe hope also that this Congress will ex- tend the impacted aid program for a sufficient number of years to en- able communities to make long-range plans. We would further urge that Public Law 874 and Public Law 815 be adjusted so that these two closely related laws have a. common expiration (late. We understand also that the committee is not considering at~ this time the amendment$ to t.he Vocational Education Act of 1963 con- tained in title II of H.R. 6320. When you do turn to this section of the bill, we will want to share our thinking with you on these matters. We believe that H.R. 6230 cont.inues and extends the important gains which have been made in elementary and secondary education. At its recent meeting on February 23, 1967, the AFL-CIO executive commc.il declared in a statement on "Education and the Federal Government": The laws which have by now been enacted have contributed significantly to improving educational opportunity and toward achieving the goal of providing quality education for every child, wherever he may live and whatever his family background. From prekindergarten programs through graduate schools and adult education programs, the Federal Government has assumed responsibility for sharing in the costs of education. For .the vital role which this committee ha.s played in bringing these things to pass, we express our deepest gratitude. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Again let me compliment you. Mr. Bieniiller. I have several questions but I feel I should refrain until we hear from PAGENO="0526" 1345 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS the other witnesses who accompany you here today. Mr. Megel, do you want to proceed with your statement? STATEMENT OF CARL 3. MEGEL, WASHINGTON REPRESENTATIVE, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS Mr. MEGEL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We are delighted to be here and to have the opportunity to testify in supplementation of the excellent statement already made by the chairman of the legislative committee of the AFL-CIO. I have, with me Mr. Herrick S. Roth, vice president of the American Federation of Teachers and the president of the Colorado Labor Coun- cil. Mr. Chairman, my name for the record is Carl J. Megel. I am the Washington representative of the American Federation of Teachers, a national, professional teacher's union of more than 130,000 classroom teachers, affiliated with the AFL-CIO. Our organization embraces 660 teacher locals, including locals in Hawaii, Alaska, the Canal Zone, the Department of Defense Overseas Dependents Schools, and in the Department of Interior Indian Schools. Representing the American Federation of Teachers, I am privileged to appear before this committee in support of H.R. 6230, a bill to strengthen and improve programs of assistance for elementary and sec- on(lary education by extending authority for allocation of funds in various areas. Principally, these include 1. Extending and amending the National Teacher Corps; 2. Providing assistance for comprehensive educational planning; 3. Improving programs of education for the handicapped; and 4. Improving programs of vocational education. By the end of this semester the Elementary and Secondary Edu- cation Act of 1~J65 will have been in existence for 2 full years. Be- cause of mlsun(lerstandings, local prejudicial resistance, and unfami- liarit.y with procedural requirement, the implementation of the origi- najl act. lacked immediate full-scale adoption. Today, the reverse is true. According to reports which we have received from our locals, enthusiastic, nationwide support is everywhere in evidence for ex- tension, improvement, and increased revenue allocations. These re- ports confirm President Johnson's statement, when he said, "I be~ lieve that future historians, when they point to the extraordinary changes which have marked the 1960's will identify a major movement forward in American education." Much credit, Mr. Chairman, belongs to the members of the Edu- cation and Labor Committee, but with special commendation to you personally for the leadership which you have exercise(l and for the years of effort which you have given to advancing our Nation's edu- cational opportunities. Pepresentin~ the American Federation of Teachers in support of the passage of ll.R. 6230, I do so with the approval of the Executive Coimcil of the American Federation of Teachers and with a general mandate from the national convention of our organization. TJnfor- timatelv, our enthusiasm for this legislation is (lilninishedi because of its limitations, even though we support the general intent. PAGENO="0527" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLCATION AMENDMENTS 1349 Following the passage of the 1965 Elementary and Secondary Edu- cation Act, we confidently expected that amendments propose(l by the' 90th Congress would not only provide for extension or the act, but at. the same time would include substantial increases to coniplement our Nation's advancing educational needs. are distressed by the failure to provide for the increasing need for vocational education, school construction, or teacher salaries. 1,Ve accept the proposed extension and expansion of the National Teacher Corps program because of the urgency of its need. The American Federation of Teachers has supported a National Teacher Corps in princpile from the very inception of the idea. We did so because it represented the first effort of the U.S. Government to assist. in recruiting and encouraging high school graduates to enter the teaching profession. There are now slightly more than 1.~0() Teacher Corps members, gamely proving the value of the Teacher Corps concept. rrhey por- tray living evidence for the continuation and expansion of this program. Not only will proposed extension and expansion of the Teacher Corps fulfill neglected educational needs of millions of impoverished children, but., it. will additionally stimulate teacher morale and bring dignity to the teaching profession in every segment of our school svs- tern. General teacher shortages are increasing. Most recent figures show that the number of teachers in the Tufted States who (10 not. meet minimum requirements established for certification in their State is actually increasing. Iii 1965, 8L800 such unqualified teachers were teaching in our schools. However, in September 1966, this number had iiic.rease.d to 8,~0() so that. 90.500 such teachers are now found in our schools. Nationwide, this shows that 4.8 percent of the entire teaching staff did not. meet State requirements in 19(~. Yet, this fi~ure increased to 5.1 Percent. in the fall of 1966. During this space and atomic age. America's children deserve com- petent., highly qualified teachers. We. are. convinced that. extension of the. National Teacher Corps as outiined in ll.1L (~i() will contribute to this stimulation. The Teacher Corps embodies two ideals: First, to encourage high school graduates to ccnsider teaching as a career. Second, to encourage competent, well-qualified, experienced teachers to enlist in the Teacher Corps. Much of the success of the Teacher Corps program depends upon the la4t.ter. Yet., section 154, article. 1, regarding Teacher Corps com- pensation specifies that: An experienced teacher who is not leading a teaching team shall he (oml)efl- sated at a rate which is equal to the rate paid by such agency for a teacher with similar training and experience who has been assigued similar teaching duties. This article mitigates against an ex~erienced teacher moving into a low-paying school district, from a district which pays higher sal- aries. PAGENO="0528" 1350 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS We propose that the article be amended by including the following phrase: Except that no teacher shall be paid less than the teacher would have received for similar services by the original school agency. We have always been complimentary of legislation that specified that employment of personnel shall be at the prevailing wage. In all of our previous testimony we called specific attention to the fac.t that one of the unfortunate omissions in each of these legislative pro- posals was the failure to provide direct funds or incentives for in- creased teacher salaries. As in the past, we sincerely urge that a professional teacher's salary beginning at an amount of no less than $7,000 and increasing to at least S14-.000 in no more than 10 steps be established as a national norm and that funds and incentives be incorporated to make such a salary schedule possible. It is a known fact that many teachers shun assignment to disadvan- taged schools. To attract teachers to these areas, some officials have proposed "combat pay," aggregating S1,000 to teachers who would accept such transfers. We oppose such devices as demeaning to the students and as besmirching the dignity of a teacher. Instead, we strongly urge the adoption of the AFT more effective schools program, now in highly successful operation in some 35 New York City slum area schools and recently approved for introduction into the Baltimore schools; and I have a copy of this report which I should like to file with my testimony. The American Federation of Teachers' more effective schools pro- gram is based on an overall plan devised to meet the needs of the dis- advantaged school of today. It makes recommendations as to hous- ing, class size, staffing, and instruction. The very fact that requests by teachers for transfer to the more effective schools exceeds the number of vacancies attests to the effec- tiveness of the program. Housing is an important element of the more effective schools pro- gram. Yet H.R. 6230 makes no provision for school construction, generally. Available data shows that we are now short 104,000 class- rooms throughout the Nation. This means t.hat between 2 and 3 mil- lion students are crowded into already overcrowded classrooms, thereby depriving 5 to 6 million students from functional educational opportunities. The inadequacy of the vocational education allocation and incen- tives constitutes an equally serious omission. At a time in our history when automation and technology are rapidly changing job demands, our Nation sorely needs skilled craftsmen and technicians. Anyone who recently has tried to get his automobile repaired will painfully learn of the shortage of auto mechanics. Try to repair minor mal- functions in your your home and you will soon learn of the shortage of plumbers. These are but two examples of our need for expanded vocational training opportunities. Many other equally obvious pres- entations could be made in support of increased vocational education needs. We urge inclusion of additional revenue for this purpose. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, we extend our appreciation for the opportunity we have had to present our point of view. PAGENO="0529" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1351 I would now like to call on my colleague, Mr. Roth. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much, Mr. Megel I want to compliment you on a fine statement. I feel just as you feel that we should go much further in the area of Federal aid to education, in the area of school construction, and expand the present programs. I first want to address some questions to Mr. Biemiller. I notice you concluded your statement by suggesting that we extend-that. we make an extension of the loans, not only of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. but 815 and 874. The testimony has been most im- pressive all through these hearings, and if we are unable to impress the Congress this year, and if this committee fails to extend these programs for a reasonable duratioii of time; I think we will be derelict in our responsibility because the chief complaint seems to be these local school agencies throughout the Nation cannot do any effective and wise planning because there is no stability in the legislation. They just do not know whether it. is going to be in existence or not for the next school year. I am hopeful, Mr. Biemiller, and I certainly agree with your suggestions, how long should we give this program some stability so that the Appropriations Committee may act early in the school year so the total educational districts can do their employ- ing in April and May long before the end of the fiscal year. It will be of great assistance in this legislation if we can put a rea- sonable duration period on these bills. How long would you suggest we should extend title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act beyond June 30, 1968, and all other titles of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act in order to get this program moving and to give the program confidence throughout. the Nation ? Mr. BIEMILLER. I would think Mr. Chairman it would certainly not be a mistake to extend the impact. bills for at least a 5-year authori- zation. Certainly in the foreseeable future there is not going to be any great diminution of the concept of Federal impact. That law has been on the books now for a decade and a half or so. I think it has been demonstrated time after time both in terms of ex- tending the authorization and in voting the appropriations for these two bills that the Congress is overwhelmingly in support of this pro- posal and, hence, I don't. think that the Congress would be. at all amiss to a making of a 5-year extension of the authorization. Chairman PERKINS. I notice that. you dwell on the Teachers Corps and the important. prmciple of local control of education. Do you see anything wrong w-ith the operation of the corps from infringing upon the rights of the local educational agencies, as tile proposal is presently written, by permitting the Office of Education to do the recruiting? Mr. BIEMILLER. I certainly see no difficulties thei-e. I would like to ask Mr. Sessions who is a member of the T)istrict of Columbia School Board to comment on that proposal. Mr. SESSIoNs. I am John Sessions of the AFL-CIO Education De- 1)~irtment and as Mr. Biemiller said a nmember of the \Vasllingtomm School Board. Our experience has been very favorable with this. WTe have something in the neighborhood of "Teacher Corps" interns in our school system and like all teachers they are attached to the appropriate division of school system, those working in the secondary schools being directed by our division of secondary schools, and those 75-492 O-67--pt. 2---34 PAGENO="0530" 1352 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS working in the. elementary schools are attached to that division of the school system. The experience has been very favorable. The teachers have been very happy to have these interns in their situations. They are being used in some of the lowest iiicoine schools in the District and are having a very good effect. Incidentally through the training program that involves some of the universities, they have done a great deal to in- volve the universities and the resources of the universities in our school system. This has been sort of a spillover effect that has been very helpful. Chairman PERKINS. Does your knowledge of the universities assume the responsibility of doing the training? Have they ever had any pres- sure on them from the Office of Education or have, they ever been inter- fered with in any way? Mr. SESSIONS. I am quite sure they have had none. Chairman PERKINS. Have the Board members in your school system had any suggestions from the Office of Education in the way `of inter- fering with the curriculum or in any other manner? Mr. SESSIONS. Not at all. Chairman PERKINS. iou tell me that you have about 40 teachers ~vho were recruited by the Office of Education through the National Teachers Corps recruiting system in your District of Columbia school system? Mr. SESSIoNS. That is right. Chairman PERKINS. Do-just how effective have these teachers been? Mr. SESSIoNs. I can tell you of at least one school in which several of these Teachers Corps interns were working in elementary schools which most people feel was one of the most ineffective schools in the District and today within a year the parents tell me they feel they have one of the best elementary schools in the District of Columbia. I doift think that is entirely the result of the Teachers Corps but I think they have made a great contribution to the improvement in this particular school which happens to be the Anthony Bowen School. Chairman PERKINS. I know we have an explosive situation here in the District of Columbia but I have felt for several years if we are ever going to do something about the real problem existing here in the District of Columbia it is through the elementary and secondary educational system. I take it that you feel that the educational sys- tem here iii District of Columbia has been immensely strengthened as a result of the Teachers Corps. Am I correct in that statement from your testimony? Mr. SEssIoNs. Yes, I think I should emphasize for the Teacher Corps interns don't go very far in a school system and we have con- centrated these in a few. Chairman PERKINS. Are they working with the people in the dis- advantaged areas of the city where the income is the lowest and where the need is the greatest. Mr. SESSIONS. These are exactly the schools we put them in. I think I should emphasize they don't just teach during the schoolday. They run tutorial programs after school and work with these kids in the evenings. We are having a very real impact in some of these areas. PAGENO="0531" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1353 Chairman PERKINS. Have you been able to notice some results as a result of the interns in these areas, favorable results? Mr. SEssIoNs. Of course, it is early to measure the impact of this on the learning experience of the children but I think it is quite clear that they have made contact with these children and I suspect in too many cases our school systems have not really made that much progress yet. Chairman PERKINS. Have you had any problems recruiting quali- fied teachers at the present time to put them in the areas where we have real problems in the District of Columbia? Mr. SEssIoNS. We have some problems, and we have a rather novel program. I can underline what Mr. Biemiller was saying about the importance of long-term and long-range facilities and fiscal planning in a school system. Our whole school budget, not just the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and the impacted aid part of it but the whole scale program has to be acted upon by Congress and un- fortunately does not usually get done until after the school system gets started and it is very difficult to employ teachers after the school year has already started. So I can tell you from my own experience the real importance of being able to plan ahead on these things. Chairman PE1i~INs. Thank you. Now-, Mr. Biemiller I want to ask you a basic question more or less on your past experiences and observations in our efforts to obtain Fed- eral aid now throughout the years. I notice that. you go ahead and mention tile local control that is involved in so many of these programs and you give a history of tile categorical aid approach in various pieces of legislation that have been enacted. There are members on tile committee at the present time who feel that we should go in the direction of a general Federal aid bill today as a substitute for what they term "categorical approach" even though we have not been successful in getting the general aid approach en- acted for some 20 years. WTould you feel if we undertook to substitute. the general aid approacii and get away from the categorical approach in this legisla- tion that we would have real problems in getting the bill enacted ? Mr. BIEMILLER. Mr. Chairman, it. is my considered opinion that. t.he Congress having tried or rather I should say the education committees of both Houses and having tried general aid bills for many years and having them defeated for a combination of reasons which were quite understandable when you analyze the voting habits and the back- grounds of the Members of the Congress, that. the Congress has been very wise indeed to have turned to the categorical approach. It. is quite obvious that. I)y this approach we have obtained tile consent. of a majorit.y of both Houses of the Congress in authorizing and I hope eventually in appropriating considerable. sums of money badly needed by our educational system. For whatever my view is worth I still believe that an attempt. to return to a general aid sstem would rumi into difficulties that would probably make it impossible to pass legislation. Chairman PERKINS. I only make mention of that fact because I know there are members on this committee who have not followed the history of the enactment. of this legislation throughout the years. PAGENO="0532" 1354 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Considering the fact that vocational education was categorical in approach and that the NDEA when we zeroed in in the field of foreign languages, mathematics, and so on, and broadened out to other cate- gories and at present we are zeroing in in some areas of the country under the Elementary and Secondary Act in the most disadvantaged areas of the Nation, where people reside w-ith low income, giving them special educational programs. I have one other question I want to ask you. I notice that you made mention of the handicapped legislation and the regional centers which w-ould assist schools in meeting the needs and helping parents find the appropriate schooling for handicapped children. I have had corre- spondence all along through the years calling on me to see if I could give, some advice w-here they can put. their handicapped child in school. I think this is a great amendment. The only difficulty I find with it is that it is not l)road enough and it is not financed to the extent that I would like to see it financed but I agree with your statement there and I don~t think there will be any objection to that amendment. You gave excellent testimony, Mr. Megel and we appreciate it. Mr. Sc li erie. Mr. SCHERLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My first question would be: Are all of you at the table here affiliated with the AFL-CIO? Mr. BIEMILLER. That is right: yes. Mr. SCHERLE. I think I have one quest iou for Mr. Sessions. The chairmaui asked whether there. had been any intervention or problem concerning the Teacher Corps in regard to the university; is that right. ? You said ~No"; is that right Mr. SESSIONS. I can't speak authoritatively for the universities but. I think the answer would be "No" from what I know of their work. Mr. SCIIERLE. As long as this is partially funded *by the Govern- ment, would there be any intervention? Mr. SESSIoNs. I did not quite get the question. Mr. SCHERLE. As long as some. of this money is being funded, would there dare be any intervention or pi-oblem occur along that line? Mr. SEssIoNs. The question as I got it from the chairman was: Had there been intervention in this program by the Office of Education, and I think here the answer is clearly "No." Obviously the limits of the legislatioui iii a sense are a. kind of inter- vention. That is, von cannot use Teacher Corps interns in high-income schools, and this is a kind of intervention but I don't think that is what. was meant. Mr. SCHERLE. I noticed in the testimony here that there has been quite a bit. of reference made to the inner city poverty. Are you as concerned about the rural areas as you are the inner city? Mr. BIEMILLER. We are most certainly concerned about. rural prob- lems. We simply testify in our formal statement on the question of the inner city because obviously our own experiences as far as the AFL-CIO are concerned are closer connected to that. problem. But the whole question of rural poverty, of the difficulties of many rural school systems have long remaiiied-received our attention. As the chairman was kind enough to say, for more than 20 years we have been up here trying to get. attentioui paid to rural problems just as much as we have to city problems. PAGENO="0533" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1355 Mr. SCIIERLE. For the many hours that I have sat. through testi- mony here I have heard very little mention of the rural poverty strick- en, and coming from a State that. has the highest literacy rate in the Union, Iowa, many of the programs innovated here we do not have, but we do have areas that could stand and use additional help. Your organization is represented there just as well as it is here. I can find no area or no means of support that you have given back there, as you are emphasizing here in your testimony here today. Mr. BIEMILLER. Congressman, I would be very happy to talk to our Iowa people. I can tell you in terms of the State where I had t.he pleasure of not only being a. general organizer for the movement but a member of the legislature in 1939, 1940, and 1941 in Wisconsin we paid a great deal of attention to rural education as well as city edu- cation. Mr. SCHERLE. What were some of the things you did? Mr. BIEMILLER. WTe worked very closely with the farm organiza- tions. We certainly were always in favor of getting au equalization formula that w-ould pay special attention to rural problems and I represented a city of Milw-aukee district here from my own constitu- ents who felt I was leaning over backward in terms of some of those equalization programs and the State federation of labor was always behind that program in our State. I can't testify for recent years because I have not been there but I can certainly tell you what w-as going on in that period. Mr. SCHERLE. There is a great deal of publicity this year through- out the Nation in regard to the series of teacher strikes. Were they basically in areas where the AFL-CIO or A.F. of T. w-ere prominent? Mr. BIEMILLER. Mr. Herrick Roth can speak to that. Mr. RoTH. There have been strikes of both kinds of organizations that represent teachers, both the association and the union. Most of these have beeii in cities. Most. of them have been over difficulties of determining who the representing authorities would be for collec- tive bargaining or collective negotiations p~Irposes, but 1)0th organiza- tions have been involved. Mr. SCIIERLE. Do you think this is a healthy situation for the chil- dren involved for the teachers to strike? Mr. RoTH. I think the position of our organization is that. the strike is the very last resort that anybody uses including the teachers. We heard an excellent statement at a conference which we attended yes- terday by the Under Secretary of Labor in which I think lie put his finger on the problem. The problem is that the frustrations of teachers get so great. at a point where all reason and logic, fail that is at that point is where they actually leave the classroom. I would like to refer to a statement by the Association of American School Boards w-here lie pointed out that there were more days lost in schools for going to special athletic events and for legalized includ- ing your State for teacher conventions, that have been written into law for some time than have ever been host in teachers leaving the classroom but the greatest loss is in the great turnover of teachers. The statistics in the Office of Eclucatiomi are extremely good on this. Only 11 percent. of all of the people who are certified to teach ever PAGENO="0534" 1356 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS retire from or die in teaching which means there is a constant turn- over of talent and capability. This has nothing to do with the strike. You see the strike as a weapon has only been used really to secure for teachers better teaching conditions and to really shore up the stability of an educational system. Mr. SCHERLE. At. the expense of the students. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. RoTh. Those were your words, not mine, Mr. Congressman. Mr. BIEMILLER. Mr. Chairman, may I add just one slight addition to the question before this which Congressman Scherle asked? Our director of education, Mr. Walter Davis, reminds me that we have regional meetings from time to time of our State officials at which we go over our policy declarations and such. He wants me to assure you tha.t we will be checking into this question of making sure that our State federations take as much interest in rural education as they do in city education. Mr. FORD. Thank you, gentlemen. I might say to Mr. Scherle in defense of my friends in the National Education Association, the other major teachers group, that in my district last fall we had four school districts out on strike, at the same time and three of them were represented by the Education Association, one by the Federation. I don't know whether the education association in my State has be- come more militant or not but the.re. was a time when they used to say that the education associations did not strike, they used sanctions. WTe. could argue all day about which has the greatest effect on the school district. But. at least ill niv State the teachers don't respoiicl t.o local condi- tions much differently in either of the two organizations. I might sa.y in addition to this that in the two districts where we had the longest period of teacher discontent as evidenced by this type of activity, the issue that kept them out was not money or teacher salaries or classroom size or anything of the kind but the right to participate in the. professional activity of developing curriculum for the st.udents. Strangely that has been one~ function that school boards in my State are most reluctant to share. with the professional people that they hire to run their schools. I would like to go back to the comments made in Mr. Biemiller's testimony concerning financing of this legislation in the current year. Mr. Biemiller, pre.ceding you by several da.ys we have had testimony from the U.S. Office of Education, from the Secretary himself, and from the Commissioner indicating that. their present intent is to co- operate w-ith the Bureau of the Budget. in requesting sums of money from the Appropriations Committee of this House approximating 49 percent of the amount we authorized last year. However, in looking at. what the Bureau of the Budget has deter- mined as their idea of what should be financed, we find what appears to me t.o be a clear-cut invasion of the legislative process by the execu- tive. branch. Although they i~~'opose to finance title I assistance to basically underprivileged children at the rate of 49 perceiit, they propose to finance. adult, basic education-which for some rea~n the Budget. Bureau finds to he a better program and I have no disagree- PAGENO="0535" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1357 ment with them on the merit of the program-at 75 percent. ~%Vhen we get to crippled children they have decided in their wisdom that a little less than 10 percent of what we authorized would be an appro- priate sum to expend. I notice that you, like all other frieiicls of this legislation who have appeared before you, spoke favorably to the chairman's suggestion of longer authorizations, maybe even 5 years at~ a time. But it would seem that the authorization and the ~~rogram are drawing further and further apart here in the Congress and that maybe this committee will have to assert itself. I don't think we can strike but I think we may have to find some more effective way of making our wishes heard with regard to the educational needs of the country. I think it is a sad commentary on the 90th Coiigress after the great~ start, and it was just a start, made in this field by the 89th Congress that we are now sitting here in the middle of March talking about 49 percent of funding. I was also interested in your comments with regard to title V(b). There is concern over the interpretation of the presemit language made by the Office of Education that this would authorize the Governors of the several States to appoint a planning agency which may or may not be the regular State educational agency. In Public Law 89-10 we wrote a definition which is somewhere be- tween the position you take which is that the plannmg should always be done by the State educational agency and the position taken by the Office of Education that the State educational agency might but is not necessarily the one to do the planning. In that definition we said that a State educational agency was that agency which normally had control of elementary and secondary schools but in the absence of agency with such clearly defined authority such agency as the legislature or the Governor might designate. Would you find any objection to substituting that kind of definition for the language we presently have in the bill? Mr. BIEMIr~r~ER. No; I have no objection to that, Congressman Ford. We were using the phrase "State educational agency" generically rather thami the specific term. I am aw-are of the problem you state where some of the State educa- tional agencies may have a different title and they may have different powers. As you say in those instances obviously the State legislature would have to act. Mr. FORD. It. is fair to infer from what you said that you are sup- porting the position this committee has previously taken that in those States where by statute or constitution there is a clearly defined State agency with such responsibility that that should be. the agency for plan- ning, and if there is something else to l)e arranged there should be latitude for the State to make such provisions. Mr. BIEMILLER. I have no quarrel with that whatsoever. Mr. FORD. Thank on. Mr. Bie.miller, and the rest of you gentle- men. For myself I w-ould like to say this is now the third time that you have appeared as a part. of the panel concermng the legislation be- fore this committee not only in this area but in several other areas of PAGENO="0536" 1358 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS education. We consider you aiid other professional organizations with a special interest iii education to be among the primary and moving forces in successful adoption of the foot-in-the-door legisla- tion which we call the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. I am very gratified to see that. you are not. happy to accept that as a longstanding victory and are now agitating, and I use the word ad- visedly. I hope you will continue to do so for an expanded funding of these programs now that. we have them started. Mr. Dellenback. Mr. DELLENBACK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Time runs and I would like to go into a lot of points with you to get further thinking because I think some of this is very helpful to me but the clock marches inexorably. First, may I add to what my colleague from Michigan just said, a further point, in connection with our flat recommendation of V (a) (1), naming the State departments. We have a State department of education and a State department of higher education in Oregon, and there is a drawback to being too flat in the legislation. Mr. BIEMILLER. As I told Congressnian Ford, I repeat that we are simply making sure that it is the educational agency. WTe w-ere using the term generically and not necessarily specifically. Mr. DELLENBACK. In the closing portion of your `testimony you made the comment. and this quotation from the executive council indicates that you approve of the fact that the Federal Government has assumed responsibility for sharing in the cost of education. WTe have had estimates so far given to us that probably on an over- all basis the Federal Government is now carrying somewhere between 5 and 8 percent of the. costs of education on the elementary and second- ary level. Do you have any idea how far you think this should go? I served in our State legislature and they used to bandy around cer- tain percentages that. were the goal, always less than 50 percent for State contributions in that area. Do you have any idea what percen- tage you are thinking of there? Mr. BIE~IILLER. As you know those percentages vary from State to State considerably so there is no problem you can follow oii the matter. We have long argued that we think that the time has come and now the Congress agreed with us last. year that part of the funds for t.he educational system of the United States should come from the progres- sive income, tax of the Federal Government. Mr. DELLENBACK. We realize that. when we talk about the levels of government Contril)utiflg, what in large part. we are saying is what will be the tax source of the contribution. Are we talking real property taxes, Federal income taxes, or what? Mr. BIEMILLER. `We are trying to take the added educational and financial burden in the United States, which I don't think will ever drop back because of the population explosion, and there will alw-ays be children as long as the human race exists. `We want to get part of the financial burden of education off of the property tax. Mr. DELLENBACK. Do you have a rough percentage? Mr. BIEMILLER. We have never set any arbitrary figure. `We would like, to see the Federal Government participate with what. in the wis- PAGENO="0537" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1359 doin of the Congress is the niaximuni participation we can have, being very careful to add as the chairman pointed out we want the safe- guards which the Congress has properly put up for local control of education. Mr. DELLENBACK. You feel in both absolute dollars and percentages the Federal contribution should increase? Mr. BIEMILLER. Definitely. Mr. DELLENBACK. Mr. Sessions, may I ask you a fast question? What if the same amount of Federal money that has at the present time been used say in the last year for Teacher Corps training in the Di~t.rict w-ere to be given to your l)oard for teacher training purposes? Could you make good use of those funds for teacher training purposes? Mr. SEssIoNs. We could certainly use additional support in teacher training but I Suspect that this particular funding would very simply become lost in the shuffle. I think here w'e have the kind of concen- trated program that for really a minimum expenditure of money it has had enormous impact in the school system. Mr. DELLENBACK. You feel if the same amount of money that went into Teacher Corps training of I)istrict teachers w'ere t.o be given to the District to be used for teacher training purposes it would be less advantageously used by your board than the present funds through the teacher training corps? Mr. SESSIONS. I think it. would simply spread out the funds that are now supporting for the very effective teachers over a whole school system that would have been lost. Mr. DELLENBACK. Even if it were to be used for teacher training for the disadvantaged would it still be lost. ? Mr. SESSIONS. I would think so. Mr. DELLENBACK. So you feel your board would not do as effective a job as the Teacher Corps does? Mr. SESSIONS. I would think that is correct. I clout mean to pi~- dude that we would not be glad to get some. extra assistance in teacher training programs. Mr. DELLENB,~CK. We are talking really about money-all roads lead to Rome-and we are talking about funds in large part and we are talking about reaching goals and I am wondering in the dialogue about the Teacher Corps whether we are not. really talking about the best way to educate and the Teacher Corps at the present time looks like the only way. If the funds were made available could you do a better job if they were in your control and your answer is apparently no. Mr. SESSIONS. No, sir, w'ith these particular funds. Incidentally, the effect. has spread over the whole school system. For instance, one of the universities that is involved in training the interns is running I notice an all clay conference for teachers on time meaning of educational technology. This is something that is an out growth of the work they have been doing with the. Teacher Corps. Mr. DELLENBACK. Mr. Megel, do you think there should be standard teachers sal a ries tim roughout. the Nat ion Mr. MEGEL. There should be a standardization of teachers salaries above levels that are now- paid. PAGENO="0538" 1360 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENPS Mr. DELLENBACK. I am not talking about the level at the moment. In your testimony you talk of a minimum of $7,000 up to $14,000 in no more than 10 steps. Mv question is because of the brevity of time, do you feel there should be standard teachers salaries? Mr. MEGEL. There should be a figure that would be within the prov- ince of gaining teachers in the teaching profession. Mr. DELLENBACK. On a standard basis so that in such and such a State and in New York City there should be a standard salary? Mr. MEGEL. If you have a salary schedule within those limits of $7,000 to $14,000 that would take care of the situation. Mr. DELLENBACK. So you don't. really feel there should be standard salaries. You are talking about a minimum. Mr. MEGEL. I think that is what I said in my statement, yes. Mr. DELLENB.~CK. l)o von feel the determination of these standards or minima should be taken care of by the Federal Government? Mr. MEGEL. Some kind of a standard schedule that w-ould give some idea of the value of a teacher in the classroom, yes, sir. Mr. DELLENBACK. You don't feel this should be left to the control of the individual States. Mr. MEGEL. Yes, within limitations of that salary schedule or some- thing between. Mr. DELLENBACK. in other words, the Government should by stick or carrot bring about a minimum that all of the States must adhere to? Mr. MEGEL. No. Mr. DELLENBACK. The States should be left in control of their own teachers salaries? Mr. MEGEL. The average teacher today in the United States-for all of the teachers in the United States are making a salary of $628. We are not going to get that salary increased unless we do a job of great. pressures and until the Federal Government recognizes the value of teachers in classrooms. Part of the problem is not. getting a sufficient salary. Mr. DELLENBACK. Mr. Bieiniller, you get the point of my question. Recognizing what. is being said about. raising salaries, the question that. I asked is, Should it be within the province of the Federal Govern- ment to set salaries-salary standards or should it. be within the prov- ince of the State government.? Mr. BIEMILLER. I think the carrot. system of establishing certain minimums would have, very real value. Mr. DELLENBACK. On the Federal level? Mr. BIEMILLER. Ies. Mr. DELLENBACK. So this should not be left to the States? Mr. BIEMILLER. The carrot. system I emphasize however- Mr. DELLENBACK. But the Federal carrot rather than a State? Mr. BIEMILLER. Yes. Mr. DELLENBACK. I would like to go on but. I recognize the tal) of the gavel was a gracious way of saying my time has run out. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Meeds. Mr. MEEDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I w-ould like to join my colleague from Michigan in welcoming you gentlemen to the corn- mittee and note t.his is also the third time I have had the pleasure of listening to your testimony in support. of education and many other things which I consider to be of interest to the people at large. PAGENO="0539" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1361 I would like to direct my first question t.o Mr. Sessions if I may and on page 3 of his prepa.red statement Mr. Biemiller said, speaking of the Teacher Corps: It has brought into the inner city school something of the same spirit that the Peace Corps previously brought to undeveloped areas in other parts of the world. Do you agree with that., Mr. Sessions? Mr. SEssIoNs. I think t.hat is quite true. These interns are dedicated people who work with these children around the clock and they have brought very much that kind of a spirit. Mr. MEEDS. Do you feel further that. the Teacher Corps concept has the effect of infusing the young people, and some of the dedicated teachers of this Nation, with an esprit. de corps which would not be available on a local level? Mr. SEssIoNs. I think so and I think this has a way of spreading together teachers around a.s Mr. Biemiller suggested. Mr. MEEDS. I am not suggest.ing, and I am sure you are not suggest- ii~g either, that local school boards could not put. in effective training programs and effective programs for disadvantaged children, but on the national level we would not have the dual advantages of a pro- gram which had a center core and a direction and also the ability to bring this dedication out in people as the Peace Corps has done on an interim basis? Mr. SEssIoNs. Yes, I think it is very much the same sort of situa- tion as if we had taken the Peace Corps money and simply used it for increased foreign aid, and I suspect it would not have, had nearly as beneficial an effect, and I think that. is true. here also. Mr. MEEDS. Is this one of the primary reasons that you Support the Teacher Corps? Mr. SEssIoNs. Yes, sir. Mr. MEEDS. Mr. Biemiller, I am somewhat puzzled and I suppose this is in the area of your legislative backgrouiid too so to speak. I would like to point out you have been a Member of this body for 4 years, and you have been the representative of the AFL-CIO for a number of years so that. in the fluial analysis you have been very in- timately and very closely connected with either posing or passing legislation through this Congress since about 1949 I think, isn't that true? Mr. BIEMILLER. I was a Member of the 79tl~ and 81st and I have been a representative of the labor movement since 1935. Mr. MEEDS. You testified before this committee as a member, and as a Member of Congress in numerous attempts to 1)~l5S aid to educa- tion, have you not? Mr. BIEMILLER. That is right. Mr. MEEDS. You have been legislative representative for the AFL- CIO and have come up to the Hill any number of times and talked to Members about the passage of aid-to-education legislation, have you not? Mr. BIE~rILr~i~a. That is right. Mr. MEEDS. It is my observation that you are probably the most knowledgeable, or one of the most knowledgeable people, in the whole ITnited States as to what makes Congress tick and what will go and what won't~ go in Congress. That is 11w aside, Mr. Chairman. PAGENO="0540" 1362 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. BIEMILLER. Iou are very kind. Mr. MEEDS. After laying that background I am going to ask you this, I am referring to section ~O5 of the Elementary and Seconda.ry Education Act, subsection ~- That to the extent consistent with a number of educationally deprived chil- dren, the school districts of the local educational agency who are enrolled in private elementary and secondary schools, such agency has made provision for including special educational services and arrangements (such as dual enroll- fluent, educational radio and television, and mobile educational services and equi~)ment) in which such children can participate. The bill goes on and enumerates many other things. In your opin- ion would that be the key phrase that broke the deadlock over aid to education in this Congress Mr. BIEMILLER. Yes: I think it definitely was. Mr. MEEDS. As a legislator and as a Member of this Congress can von see. any way at this time of gaging the temper of Congress, the Constitution. and all of the, other things which you have taken into consideration as a legislator and as a legislative representative; can von see any way to project general aid to education without including something like that, and if YOU dont include something like that should we Iass it Mr. BIEMILLER. I stated earlier in answer to a question from the chairman that for whatever my opinion is worth, I still think the Con- gress is devoted to categorical aid, to the types of statement that you are speaking of, and I do not believe that you would have much suc- cess in passing a general aid bill at this time. Mr. MEEDS. You are also knowledgeable about Public Law 874 which allocates money to school districts on the basis of children who arc federall connected. This type of feeling may be used for general aid and in fact it is being used now, is it not Mr. BIEMILLER. That is the point. The Federal impact bill is predicated upon the theory of a direct. Federal impact. on a given school district, magnifying the problems of that given school district. As long as you have a legitimate Federal impact I think this is a pro- cedui-e and I will illustrate that, if I may, by testimony which I gave shortly after the 1954 school decision on segregation when the AFL a pJ)eared in behalf of legislat ion proposed by Congressman Stewart lidall to extend the Federal aid concept into school districts that were having problems that arose from the decision of the Supreme Court which we regarded as Federal impact on those districts. WTe have had a modified form of that in some of the titles of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as I pointed out in my testimony. Mr. MEEDS. Where we do have this Federal impact and can trace it we have been able to give general aid to education, have we not ? Mr. BIEMILLER. W1~ere you can trace Federal impact, yes. Mr. MEEDS. Thank you. Cli airman PERKINS. Mr. Gardner. Mr. GARDNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Having not been here for the entire testimony. I would just like to make some general com- ments and ask specific questions of Mr. Biemiller. First. of all, we have beeii listening to testimony for the past week concerning the Teacher Corps. and it would seem to me that the one strong statement that I have heard in favor of it is through a National Teacher Corps w-e PAGENO="0541" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1363 are able to develop an esprit cle corps that we would not be able to do on the State level. Do you agree to this line of thinking? Mr. BIEMILLER. We think there is real value in tile national recruit- ment. policy of the Teacher Corps for precisely the reason you have stated. Mr. GARDNER. My observation of tile problem is that one reason tile Teacher Corps has ilad some success is because of tile funding by the Federal Government. This has been missing ill the l)ast on the part of the States. The second thing is that we have a tremendous manpower shortage not~ only in the teacher area, but in anything you can name today, and if we go on the assumption tllat tile one area where it call be accom- plished is through a national program to develop esprit de corps, would you then be in favor of a doctors corps and a nurses corps and a mechanics corps? Mr. BIEMILLER. No, because I dont think the same situations prevail. Mr. GARDNER. Don't we have the same critical shortages in nurses? Mr. BIE~IILLER. We have a. critical shortage ill nurses and doctors, primarily because we do not have sufficient training facilities in those areas. You cannot put many more trainees into the existing medical colleges. Mr. GARDNER. This is not. true in my State. We have a terrific problem in our medical schools at Duke and the Fniversit.y of North Carolina of obtaining students who want to go into the practice of medicine. Mr. BIExILLER. Conditions have changed very drastically since I last looked at it. As some members will recall Senator Taft. and I jointly sponsored a. bill in 1950 trying to get. substantial aid into the medical, dental nursing schools of this country. I regret that Senator Taft was successful in passing it ~fl the Sen- ate. I was stymied by the Rules Committee in the House of Repre- sentatives. However, since that. time tue Congress has passed a modified version of that. bill and it passed it on the very legitimate argument of tile medical colleges and the AMA itself that there was a shortage of fa- cilities for students who wanted to enter medical colleges. I am not disputing your given figures because I frankly am not familiar with them but the general picture for years has been that there have been more applicants for the medical schools in J)articular than tiiere have been places available for training. Mr. GARDNER. In the field of nursing, this is not true. I think you have a very similar situation in the field of nursing that you w-ould have in teaching-low salaries, long and unattractive hours. Mr. BIE~III~LEri. Congress has passed on several occasions contribu- tions for the. development of training nurses, not only registered nurses but 1)ractical nurses. Mr. GARDNER. Going on the assumption you had a similar situation w-ith nursing that you had low salaries and not attractive, to people and 50 on, would you then recommend we have a Nurse Corps sponsored and funded by tile Federal Government? Mr. BIEMILLEIi. To use tile doctor analogy for a moment, we have had proposals that might roughly l)arallel what your are speaking of. PAGENO="0542" 1364 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDIJCATION AMENDMENTS Senator Cotton, for example, of New Hampshire, has long advocated a system of Federal scholarships for doctors whereby the graduate doctor would then agree to go into shortage areas. This is not something that is peculiar to teachers that the Federal Govern- ment has tried to stimulate through the use of Federal funds, the strengthening of other professions besides teaching. Mr. GARDNER. On page 4 you say: The Teacher Corps gives Promise of injecting new vitality into the schools and at the same time maintaining the important principle of local control of education. How do you see a combination of control between the Federal Gov- ernment and local government WTho has the final authority? Mr. BIEMILLER. The bill in front of you makes it clear that no school 1)oarcl has to accept Applicant Jack Jones unless they want to. Mr. GARDNER. It also states that Federal funds can be withheld. This seems to be some of the problem we are facing today in com- plaiiits from our local school boards. Although they are giving word service in the form of local control if they don't abide by not what. the 1)ill says but by interpretations of the Department of Education then funds are withheld. Mr. BIEMILLEIi. I am not. aware of those situations. If you want to bring concrete situations to our attention we would be happy to check into theni l)ut in our experience, and I don't pretend to know every- thing there is about the Teacher Corps, we have not run into that situation. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Steiger. Mr. STEIGER. Mr. Biemiller, good morning. It is a pleasure to have a former meml)er of the Wisconsin Legislature as well as a distin- guisheci Member of Congress here. I was very interested in the testi- mony, not only that you gave, but that Mr. Megel gave. I wonder if I could ask Mr. Sessions what is the situation with the District of Columbia school system insofar as teaching assistants or paraprofes- sionals are concerned. Do you have a program here for this kind of teacher aid? Mr. SEssIoNs. We do have a program. We have a unique situatioii of course in the District's school system in our relationship to the Congress and you may remember that the Teachers' Salary Act which Congress passedi last year places a limitation upon the number of teacher aids that we can employ in the school system. I question the wisdom of that decision. I am not. quite clear how it caine about but within the limitation that. Congress allows us we are training teacher aids and using them quite effectively in the schools. I think we could use far more of them if we had the power to do it. Mr. STEIGER. Mr. Megel, prior to the advent, of the Teacher Corps, had the Federation undertaken any kind of a program aimed at trying to encourage within educational institutions and schools of education sl)ecific programs designed to train teachers to serve in disadvantaged areas? Mr. MEGEL. Not to any great extent excepting that our efforts are always directed toward improving teachers' salaries and working con- clitions iii order to attract teachers into the teaching profession. The fact that people in other occupations with less training make a lot more money, it has always mitigated against teachers and high school grad- uates-every teacher knows he has a high school teacher in his class PAGENO="0543" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1365 who says, I cloift know why I should go to college I)ecauSe I can make more money than you do. TIt does not attract teachers to the teaching forces and to the schools of education so we have had no specific program in that direction, no, sir. Mr. STEIGER. One of the bases for support~ of the Teacher Corps as presented here both by the Office of Education and by cleans of schools of education and local superintendents has been that they feel that the Teacher Corps can innovate and make better teacher training in this country. I wonder again whether prior to the enactment~ of the rfeachel. Corps program, the Federation had undertaken to improve teacher education training in this countr. Mr. RoTh. May I answer that in part on behalf of my colleague, Mr. Steiger? Mr. STEIGER. You sure may. Mr. RoTH. W~e have had a position over the years that the best teacher training is done in the classroom. We have used various terms in our federation proposals and policies. ~\Ve have had to promulgate them primarily at school board levels. We have talked in terms of ap- prenticeships and internship. I think the exciting tiling about the Teacher Corps here and the point of our question is that it does embrace the on-the-job training with the teacher who is experienced. It is not just a matter of doing it ill the classrooni situation. Of course, as you know, no teacher in the count iv or any teacher organi- zation does control or program for any school of education. One of the reasons that~ we have not gone this other route is we hail no entree to schools or colleges of education. This is why we think training has to be clone oti the jol) by an experienced teacher preferably selected by his own colleagues. Mr. STEIGER. \Vhat kind of a position do you take in terms of en- couraging tile use of teacher aids for paraprofessionals? Do you think this is a good thing ? Would you like to see it expanded and how does it relate to the teacher's ability to more individually work with the child in any kind of a school but pai'ti(ulaily in tile (lisadvantaged areas? Mr. RoTH. Our position has beeii we have. wanted to take profes- sional duties off and with a separate statement filed with your com- mittee that will be iii your record ill this hearing I make particular point of our collective bargaining agreements ill Philaclelphia, New York and so on, where the teacher aid iS clefmecl. There. was a time w-hen teachers feared this because the teacher felt it would undercut the standards of tile profession. The time has come that with tile tile overload of tile class duties that teachers have said "Well, we real- ly ought to be there to teach, this is why ill tile effective school p~'~- gram there are two teachers iii a classroom with only 2~. One could be a teacher aid even under the terms of tile agreement so we do support. this. We are looking for an expansion of it and we know there have to be differential kinds of services in ternis of teacher aids but not in terms of tile final l)rofessional teaching duty. Mr. STEIGER. Mr. Biemiller, tile Civil Rights Commission on school cle facto segregation and desegregation made a point in saying that they felt legislation was necessary to set some Federal standards w-hich would provide that there be no more tilall ~O pe1'c~e1lt ill a school situ- ation who would be Xegro or Puerto Rican or whatever it may be. PAGENO="0544" 1366 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Has the AFL-CIO made any comment on that report Mr. BIE~IILLER. We have made no comment on that report. The report broke as the executive council was in session and we were in the middle of problems. I have no doubt, we will take a good look at it before the next meeting of our executive council l)ut at this moment there is no comment on it. Mr. STEIGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Let me thank you, Mr. Biemifler, and all of you gentlemen who accompanied Mr. Biemiller. Mr. MEGEL. May I ask Mr. Rotlfs testimony be included in the record? Chairman PERKINS. Without objection, it is so ordered. The statement follows :) TESTIMONY BY HERRICK S. RoTH, VICE PRESIDENT, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEAcHERs; CHAIRMAN, LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE, AFT EXECUTIVE COUNCIL; I~RESIDENT. COLORADO LABOR COUNcIL. AFL-CIO Upon the recommendation of AFT Washington Representative, Carl J. Megel, and the request of the Executive Council of the American Federation of Teach- ers. I have been asked to make this brief statement to your Committee today. We are pleased that the 89th Congress saw fit to pioneer Federal support of key programs in the fields `of elementary and secondary education and to expand. among others, programs in vocational services. These comments are directed specifically to these areas. With regard to our elementary and secondary education, ESEA has prompted various kinds of program innovations-all meeting minimum standards estab- lished by the Office of Education. but few reflecting truly effective schooling for either the culturally and economically disadvantaged youth or the students of so- called majority or middle class schools in predominantly Caucasian attendance areas. This is a challenge not to be taken lightly or without adequate explanation. The result might have been and was to be expected. The tendency of school administrators, school communities and their governing boards to respond with less than comprehensive programs grew out of their traditional orientations. The programs that you created and the Congress funded sought very properly, however, to find new educational avenues to reach students who had little to motivate them educationally. either at home or in the average school. As a result, amendments to the ESEA in 1967 shou~1d seek to support fewer band aid type of remedial programs and a greater number of comprehensive, ef- fective programs for total school attendance centers. Our experience in New York City's More Effective Schools Program-which is financed in its extra costs by new ESEA Federal dollars-is the proof of the pudding. Here, though. we would like to emphasize that this program was achieved by the involvement-the total involvement-of teaching faculties. In our opinion, this could not have been achieved without the positive effect of a sole collective bargaining agent-Local No. 2 of the A~1P, New York's United Federation of Teachers. It is significant that your Committee which is considering this testi- mony is appropriately a committee on "Education and La'bor." In our opinion, we believe you would be wise to include in any new amend- ments a recognition of the collective bargaining relationship as a desirable in- gredient in the process of creating and funding effective schools. We recommend that you establish a priority for funding appropriate programs of school districts w-here boards of education recognize the sole collective bargaining agency w-ith a teachers' organization. We assure you that Federal funds will be put to much more effective and beneficial use in all areas of the nation. Examples in our Western areas, including Denver. Kansas City, Tulsa. Hous- ton, Albuquerque. Tucson. Phoenix. Las Vegas, Pocatello, or Cheyenne, just to name some, are typical of cities where recognized teacher involvements would have provided more effective utilization of Federal funding. Since we are deal- ing with human development-with individual as well as group opportunity and growth-such a priority makes as much or more sense as. for instance, priori- ties established so wisely for the purchase of publicly generated electrical power for publicly owned electrical utilities in my l)art of the nation. Remedial. patched-oil" programs can meet most requiremeiits for spending Federal tax dollars. but the educational advantages of such patch-work appear PAGENO="0545" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1367 minimal and may be based on false economies when compared with total attend- ance center program funding. Let us state the ease in other terms as described by one of our progressive AFT State Federations, the Missouri Federation of Teachers, MFT, whose President is Fred N. Miller of Kansas City. MFP calls for a `Tederal School Renewal Program." Mr. Miller paints the facts of school "drop-outs"-perhaps better described as push-outs"--~as the cause of "hard core" unemployment. "Push-outs" are more than the l)roducts of ghettos and broken families who live in sub-standard conditions of economic poverty. They are products of tran- sient teachers, overcrowded classes, inadequate teaching facilities, and generally unhealthful school plants and environments. Smaller classes, adequate food. acoustical and lighting comforts, genial and loving adults, more personalized teaching attention-all items of cost an(l all related to total school program- ining-must be excited by Federal fimding and standards. As Mr. Miller points out, the hard core unemployed reduce this nation's pro- ductivity by $84,000 per person of lost earning power compared with the high school graduate who is employable. An effective school has "holding power' `-- probably costs $250 a year more per student measured in today's dollars-and is, in our opinion, the requirement that is basic to "Federal Renewal". In a school lifetime, the maximuni cost is $3,000 of greater investment which is three and one-half percent of the anticipated minimum loss to the `push-out". What a low cost for an immeasurable investment in human worth! For a moment now, let me turn to vocational or occupational education. Last year, Federal dollars appropriated by you, the Congress, funded a pilot survey of vocational education in Utah. As one of two staff consultants representing "non professional" interests among thirteemi so-called "experts" on the Utah review team, I represented the AFL-CIO. The other lay" advisor was John Harmon of the F. S. Chamber of Commerce. The report of that. Utah study is available to you in either of two volumes- detailed or summary-from George Peabody College. Division of Field Surveys. of Nashville, Tennessee. We commend its diversified recommendations to you. since vocational education is truly behind the times : likewise, it is costly in its demands. We simply raise the question: Why not set a priority on Federal funding of work-study, on-the-job, and expanded apprenticeshi~) programs? We believe you will find business and labor ready to meet the challenge and teachers and administrators ready to adjust! We commend the realistic al)proach evidenced by the AFL-CIO. even as we make these points of strong emphases: 1. The least your Committee can do at this time is to insist that the full authorizations be appropriated for all titles of ESEA in particular, as well as other Federally supported educational programs. 2. At best, $2,500,000,000 for ESEA titles is hardly enough to justify either educational or economic wisdom in fiscal 1965. Military and defense costs not- withstanding, this nation will be caught short all too soon if it does not move dramatically to finance education at two. three. and four times the present level of Federal support in the next several years. The yea!' 1967-65 should not be one of pause or wavering. The urgency of the need is self-evident anc1 should be met with firm hi-partisan support. Chairman PERKINS. You may insert any other material which you want inserted in the record. It will he inserted in the record at this poilIt. Mr. BIEMILLEIi. I would also like to insert the last policy resolu- tion of the AFL-CIO council in the field of education. Chairman PERKINS. It. is so ordered. (The document i'eferrecl to and piihhicmition entitled ~`Design for au Effective Schools Program in I rhan Centers" follows :) STATEMENT BY TILE AFL-CIO EXECUTIVE COUNCIL ON EDUCATION ANI) TILE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, FEBRUARY 23, 1967, BA!. HARBOUR, FLA. After nearly a century of stalemate, with strong leadership from the present administration, efforts to bring about federal aid to education have resulted in a series of legislative successes. During the long campaign for federal aid. 75-492 O-67--pt. 2-35 PAGENO="0546" 1368 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS the AFL-CIO played a major part, building support for the legislation and seek- ing solution to the various issues which had deadlocked the bills in Congress. The laws which have by now been enacted have contributed significantly to im- proving educational opportunity and toward achieving the goal of providing quality education for every child, wherever he may live and whatever his family background. Froni pre-kindergarten programs through graduate schools and adult education programs, the federal government has assumed responsi- bility for sharing in the costs of education. Both in terms of the amount of money that it involves and the widespread effect that it has had throughout American education, the most important of the neiv educational bills has been the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. This legislation provides federal funds to school districts in pro- portion to the number of low income children living in each district. These funds must be used to improve the educational opportunity for children from low income families. Beyond that. the school district has wide latitude in its use of the federal funds. Apart from the fact that it represents the largest financial cominitnient to education ever undertaken by the federal government, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act is noteworthy for having broken the long standing deadlock over the question of aid to non-public schools. Significant benefits under the act are available to students in non-public schools. The AFL-CIO played a key part in developing a formula by which, without doing violence to the traditional separation between church and state, children in non-public schools could derive maximum benefits from federal aid. Among other pieces of legislation of particular significance to organized labor has been the Vocational Education Act of 1963, a law which has provided ad- ditional funds and new flexibility for vocational education. The law requires vocational educators to relate their programs closely to the realistic needs of the labor market. Trade unionists have played an important part in making this goal a reality at the local, state and national levels. A third area of major concern in recently enacted education legislation has been higher education. The Higher Education Facilities Act of 1963 provided federal funds for the construction of college classrooms badly needed to accom- modate constantly swelling enrollments. As it has been urged to do by the AFC-CIO, Congress earmarked a certain portion of the money for construction of new facilities for two-year community colleges. The result has been to stimulate the development of new community colleges throughout the nation and this in turn has made it more possible for young people from low and mod- erate income families to afford to go to college. In 1965 the Higher Education Facilities Act was incorporated into a new bill. the Higher Education Act of 1965. and the authorized expenditure was con- siderably increased. In addition to the features of the original bill, the Higher Education Act provided a number of financial aids for students, among them increased federal loans under the National Defense Education Act, federal guarantee and subsidies for student loans from approved lending agencies, opportunity scholarship grants for promising low income students, and work- study programs. Altogether, these student aid programs have enabled thou- sands of young people to enter college who would not otherwise have been able to do so. There have been many other significant steps taken. Amendments to the National Defense Education Act have added new subjects to those eligible for federal assistance, among them reading, economics, civics and history. The Impacted Aid program has been amended to increase the funds available to schools in some of the major urban centers. Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides funds to assist school districts with problems related to deseg- regation. The Economic Opportunity Act made possible federal funding of many iiew programs including the first Headstart program and adult basic edu- cation programs. The Library Services and Construction Act has brought new and improved library service to millions of Americans. A provision in the Federal Communications Act has made federal funds available for the stimula- tioa and growth of educational television. And finally, the "Cold War G.I. Bill." long championed by the AFL-CIO. brings to the veterans of today's armed forces educational benefits similar to those available to veterans of World War II and Korea. Taken all together. these many federal programs add up to a significant fed- eral commitment to share in the financial responsibility for education at all levels. There nevertheless remain important unfulfilled needs. The two larg- PAGENO="0547" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1369 est items iii any school budget are for teachers salaries and for school con- struction. There is little in any of the existing federal programs that provides assistance in meeting either of these needs. The AFL-CIO believes, as it has often said in the past, that the federal government must become a full partner in financing American education. This requires expansion of existing programs and the beginning of new programs which must go far beyond those already enacted. To meet these unfilled needs, the AFL-CIO supports the following legislative program for education: 1. At the very minimum, the AFL-CIO's prograni for educational legislation must insist upon full appropriations as authorized under presently existing federal education laws. 2. Present levels of authorization are themselves inadequate to meet the pressing needs. When the time comes to re-enact the Elementary and Second- ary Education Act, the Vocational Education Act, the Higher Education Act and other existing federal aid programs. Congress must broaden the scope of these programs and substantially increase the authorized federal expenditures. Provisions should be made for the improvement of teachers' salaries and for improved training of both present and future teachers. Urgently needed is a supplemental appropriation to continue the existence of the National Teacher Corps. 3. Most school districts are burdeiied with obsolete and overcrowded class- rooms. The AFL-CIO reiterates its belief that there is a critical need for fed- eral support for new school construction to replace obsolete classrooms, to re- lieve overcrowding, and to meet future growth in enrollment. Federal support for school construction could be achieved either through new legislation or through broadening the scope of Public Law- 815 which now provides funds for school construction in federally impacted areas. 4. The Vocational Education Act of 1963 provided the funds and the flexibility needed to upgrade vocational education in our schools. The Advisory Committee on Vocational Education, established by the law-, is now evaluating the results of the program and w-hen it reports in 1968, Congress should be prepared to make necessary changes in the Act. In the meantime, we ~upport legislation introduced by Congressman Perkins to greatly increase the authorization. We also welcome President Johnson's proposal to fund new and innovative vocational programs for high school students with special needs. 5. The "Cold War G.I. Bill" i,s one of the impressive educational achievements of the 89th Congress. Provisions for apprenticeship, on-the-job and on-the-farm training, features of the original GI bills. unfortunately were not included. The AFL-CIO is disappointed to note that the President's message to Congress on "America's Servicemen and Veterans," January 31, 1967, ignores the need for these training programs. We urge Congress to approve apprenticeships, on-the- job and on-the-farm training provisions as well as amendments-include the President's message-increasing the allow-ances available to veterans while they are in school, and permitting those veterans who need to finish high school to do so without sacrificing their future college benefits. 6. The need for educational renewal in the inner cities and the rapid growth of suburban school populations have created the need for special legislation to pro- vide federal assistance in these areas. 7. No young person should be denied education beyond high school because he or she cannot afford it. Present student aid programs are helpful, but they are are far from meeting the need. The tax credit proposals presently before Con- gress would be expensive without placing the aid where it is most needed. Free public higher education should be the right of every young person. As a concrete step to bring this about w-e urge a federal program to encourage the development of tuition-free community colleges. 8. The Carnegie Commission on Educational Televisiomi has recently presented a report proposing methods of developing the full potential of educational tele- vision. The report deserves the careful attention of Congress as a preliminary step to the enactment of appropriate legislation. 9. There is great need for expanding the opportunities for adult education. Many adults, defficient in basic education, are limited in job training possibilities. Other adults find that changing technology requires them to undertake further education and training. The Economic Opportunity Act has provided funds for adult education but more federal support is needed. 10. The AFL-CIO puts special importance on labor extension programs w-hich are now functioning out of several universities. The multiplication and expan- sion of these programs should be encouraged by federal support. PAGENO="0548" 1370 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS DESIGN FOR AN IN URBAN CENTERS I Ippu' ~ too rnny h~Idren in Ih~ lid//on who dIP qrowuq up without Ihi' bu1. s/il, lIPS (!SSJly /0! /~ti,i' `u (!SS ds I t'n'n s (q.'ii Pl!,dI,iI ~ l.~li~,,,IiO(,Of/!Jll/I"i All -ClO PAGENO="0549" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1371 Tbn AFT Pg,a~ c~scd p~' dc~&d ~Q~!!~ StMi, cpc~~ d b~dg~t~~ ~`d!t.~ ~ ~d c~p~~wy pt!~. a,~d cI~ntc~ th~ I'~~g P~np&edby The National Cooncil to, Elfncticn Schools Spocoa~nd and P~bIEshnd by The Amodcan Fodneetlon at Teach.,., AFL-CIO Reciand A~g.at, 1966 PAGENO="0550" 1372 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS AN EFFECTIVE Tb. .3 ~ ~ sh~~I% 1 ~ Tb ~g~[ft~ d p.p~!.t~ ~~s!.l ~ th~ I~~b ~pp~.ft.!t!~$, SCHOOLS PROGRAM 33 ~~q!~&I I ~II ..lh, ps.'.l ,,,p..~h.d ..h.Is, IN URBAN CENTERS Tb. fthI ..,,th .ffly ~ .q..~y ft ..hi.h ~II .333, h!Id? ~3 ,,Ib-th,I, p.p~I.t~ p~d It ~ .tt,ttld p..~d. ~pp~.t,tt~l!l ,t,II,~t,.I h~II.~g.. it,g,~td ,,I~ti,,~ship~ ..d t,It,,,I .~d ,t,tt~,t~I ~~Ith d.tttg...t ,,s,,,,,s,fk,~I.dg. ~ .ti~Iy I.sl .h..t~ th&. tt~tty p.. £~t 3 ~. S~h..I. ftd.y I.,tt 3 ~.tt~tt.~t ..%.y ft 3.13.11 b.3I. .d. .t..tt.I ...ds ~ ,fth,t,ttp,,f ts.~I~htg. Ttt,$.~tt,,,h,t,,t,,,tt,,,h,~~~tt1tdty y..~ ,fd,t,,~t~bdttftt!~!t. Th,,,.,,,ttI.t.~IIiq b.... ~~tttp ~ ft .11 ~d .litt.t~I sysft.. Tb, ,...ssitt,t .3 ,.ty th,.t,s th~ ,.i.i,.t~I .d,qt.~,y ~t .11. Wh,t lb. AFT ~ Wh,t ,$t., ,,,,t(]!b,,ftt,ft,% .tt,.ftt'~'~' d.f,..t.tth,.%$.ttt..I% ~th.t~ ~I.b.q th,i .ftg.ity p.~lft..tlI d..,,t,s. I A ,t,d.dkt,,,ybh~Idt~lttII%h~&d~Y' .,,d,,.,b,If ~ WI..,, lb ...,*. ft .,.,ty 1... ..td .`...y' ghtl*I .,t.,.ty? 3 A.I, %,fl....ftqhftIh*I ....yhiId lh,dtdtI&ll.IlI'~' 4 Ap*l.,y.fItitq~*p~*i~*'~ ~h,.,.s.ili,,l,lh.,,.d..Ilh.$.htld'~", lh~., *,,,....ty, ..,d 13,1, l~Wh,,%, ."d ,..p,,lf..I .1 lb~t, p*l~IIl..l? 5. A syst... .3 pt'.*.dI q.fli,i.tly, *d~q..l.ly, ..,d p,,,,plly tb.s..* pplt.s ,.,,ss*,y I., .,,II-t,.,.,ts 6. A p..piI-;t&tt *3., lh.t *II~*~ I., s.Iti,i.,I ....,,b.' .3 p.,..It..d ps.~.,.I, I,b,.,i.,ts, p.y.h.I.gisl., s..~i.I ..,,6,,~, l,*lI1%, ,.*d'.g *.p~ll3, t*p?-ft*Il II*tiWtthip ~113 l~h~Il i,, Ii~g**Wt** *h*II~9~7 3.A,..g.,t ,,,ssp.,i.IIydlqt.dl.e~,gl'ileIh~lt*yl*t~~%hth ,*,l,ib.t. ft tb~ If. liWilg *3 hiId,~~ .,.d I. d.'..l.p p,g,.l.s ol ,.hobjlil.ti*'l? Do.. .03 lb. I..I. .1 lb oo'oio,s 5W,o*l p~,t.o, ,o,,t,oI. ,od fo, lb. ~oI,sion of ohild,..? Th. dio,opltoo lto. of lb... .h.Id o.Iy iol~IIigibIo ~h so. *sy.opl'l.lt' dol..'.. &g*iost i,,toI.,obIo .dll...'. I. 13, s,h,ol ...d lb. I..g,. .ol.olo.lIly. $.Ad,,,,oc,.t.,t,..o,~,,bth.t.Ii..tslh g.,,i,.ioloooooloflholoo.'he's fo,l,li..g.. d d,o,I,piog oIi,,..l, .pp.opiol. ft lb.., .`hild,00? 9R.,,,t,th.tth,l,hooI,.ooIooQ.I.ffOdtObO*liO~lisI*l1dt0*0 ..b.o ..IIogo? Lo.d~Ilh.p by bo.,ds of ed,*lio.' I. .obili,iog lb. il.'o,edI*lo school ,oo..W.o.ty f, bootsl..p op..otioo? Mo.. ool~osioo oppolloollios 10. p~.o0l5 ..,qhb,,s..'ds,h,oI poIfoot~olothool*dtO5ch0*I,l0bOOOPO5Odl0 l.,h,lh.,sp.,s,..Itlios,d.lPtl.li0t5?l5il.IAlc0~c.jO0b1Olh0llht5~09hl s.d I, ..*l~..IIly of ,od.,sl..diog .od l..sl*hich is b.scloolfoclo. .d..c.ltoo? 10. A plo. oi,.i,g .5 lol.IIy ioleg.ol.d schools IbM osoold ni,, oIl 0* ,h,ld..o lho oppo,l..,itytolo..,obotlloodIioO*ilhChild~OoolOWd lyoloolto.l0l, ol.9W.s, .lh.'.o, .,.d ,,Il..,of bo.ilogos? Co. *s ool 1,1.0 .doaolog. .1 lb., ,d,c.llo.'oIIy f.,o..bI. cli.,olo to bolp o.. childos d.,.lop . .co.fd ~.lb,,l p..jodtco? hA c.,,,f,toIossi,.,~slodilholiddlocls*0l*05OOd ls,o,d.to..lospoClf,I .3 lb ~tt.o,l ,.,o,i,gf,I ,,olilios ood sl,osglhs .1 OtI, mufli-focolod populoltos' PAGENO="0551" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1373 Wsll-t,s.ti,sg spsk.st~, t~y.sg tt s,t.t th s~,isis, ds bMtls tt, tpttt~t ths,tt so sd sohool systoso. Thoy y st,oggloto,oop to d toooho,s 0~ s~oIIo,ol.ssts o~otollsohooldoyto,too,yohild.Eoohotthoooo,p,oots~s ooqoostiooobly iospo,toot; hot * sotsool is osot othoss hsolth is iodis~blt. All ossottiol oloo,oots soost opststo sotoltottoosly Os toot ~111 ps000 t,oittol. It stood oooditioos lot odototi to oso ostoblishod, ths oh,ld,to otill loo,o - If tooth ots Ott p1 oooop,oftssioool oholloogs, thoy otsIl tospood likt otht, p'ofoss!tools. Thoy `till ,iso to `toot tht oholltopt. Thoy *111 sotlt to todht, thti, tot, oodo,otoodi,,g Th o'tooosttootioo of ioodoqoott sohool systttos thsooghoot tht ooootty is `tsjob,tooltsgstotsobstoot,olsolotioo lolbos!s.lt~sosso,t,oI shot ftdt,oI sod stott goottototots btooo,t ooolotd. Uth tdooot,oool systostts too, hototos,, sto,t this pto~toto It toot sohoots toth Stptootbst. Sootoss `toold o,oott its `toototo to, osts!ts!oo. Nothiog loss to!ll Wo bslit,t thot o sohool systoot, l,k otooty sotiot ,ostitot,oo, hOt 00 olootit potootiol to, bottot `tstso. A bottot sohoot systoso tooko toojot oott,ibotio,, It tho ootot000ityososooiolsolotot. Wo bolisos thot this ptogtoo, too ottootiotty tod ooosdott,io disohilitios, odootiltotsttotio,t,dolioqooooy ooddtop'ttotstootothooo,sy i,,,tsttoo,t sdditioool spotiol Tho Eftottiot Sohools pttgtot,, is otfo,td by tho A,,,o,itoo Fodttot~oo of Tootht,s osottosihlsptojstt.Woholiooofhof~t,sootoolythoo,thtollysoood, botptott.toltytttootito,.odthotsto,tp,oposo,opid tho,ootoo o tots sohstoodo,d sohotlo. Wh,lo to sioglo tlt,ooot it tho ptogtoto osssstss,loohotyofthosttlo,oootsisog,,ootottffodo,o. It this sooss sot h I A tospoosibto hoo,d of sdttolIoo to ottosso,oo ltodstship, it lbs solotito ot this ptohloto, io pootootship `tith tho stott, to pits tho toothi,tg stott tod ths toottooo.ty tsosoooblthopstt stttssoodtoittspitsthstototsot'ttdsothostosot. PAGENO="0552" 1374 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDIJCATION AMENDMENTS housing effective education In a large school, child ren are apt to be herded and regimented. to a small school, children can have personal relationships with all members of the staff with whom they h ave contact. Teechers feel responsible for their children's progress and take pride in their individual achievement srd the achievement of the school as a whole. The New York State Department of Education recommends en elementary school population of 400 to 800 pupils in ¶4 to 28 classes. A nationwide survey of educators sets a figure of 800 pupils as the most effective. Faced with the reality of meeting the needs of the children in seriously inadequate sc hoofs, we propose to accept the figure of 1000 as the upyer limit. It is our position that, through drasti 0 reorganization, these insdequsts buildings can serve asa base for effecti vs educetion. We must insist, however, on sufficient room within the building to afford a seat for each of these ¶ 000 children end a room for each class. in addition, space is essential for Every chitd has the right to a dependent relationship with adults. Too many children in so-called "diffIcult" schools have been daprlvsd of this childhood right because class sizes have been much too larg, and supporting services too macget. Untsss this tight is returned to them, their educational progress will be severely limited. Bonuses tot teachers wilt not return this tight. Grant the children an adequate eumber of professional adults on whom to depend, sod you grant them the right to be curious, which is the basis of Isernlng. For the first time the adults wilt haoe the opportunity to se. the chIldren as Individuats snd to build curriculum tailored to the needs of the Individual and the group. In the light of the tremendous growth of curriculum orisrtations derived from many disciplines, effective education iasfunctlon of an appropriately small dass size. If class registers wer. towered cad he ctassroow tucher were supported by an adequate number of coneuttants, creahng a child-adutt ratio of at west IS to one, special services for the physically. Intellectually, and socially malad)usted pupils, end for the supportive services. 11 Sohoals should hues ad.quata facilities fur 500 to tOte pupils, with provision to, scary nsa dad spacial servios. 2) If a school has a population i naocass of the eumbar which cue ba affectively housod, th a.ooeas childrso should be transtarrad and proeiaioo muda to, them elsewhsrs by ova of tha following procedures: a. rediatrioting b. bussingc hiidr.e to undsrutiilaad schools 0. ioatuitino dawountabla units on ae amar~oncy basis until more perm500nt housing can be built d.oonsfructiog classrooms io available uoutlllzsd upacsio soistivg school bcildiogs in housing pvoiocts for actru classrooms I. setting up classrooms In commercIal buildings. "lv. padmeaw tau&a ethfth vaefrsef zaaohaea In the au,w aohuola ma he won dlfltrclf thor thus. ohfth thath cn/heee.u Ic th. a'aesty aubcrOs !.Oa "rut Ic lh. w,ae,ba Mayo Ia lIAzI, 10 he a uwsnioea wheare aohuul ala/thea, as wavy acm vyofeaslacala par f,Stepcplta: In flu atom ova fled, * cnoa4ad, a/heIr dII50Idalad aM ueslfruollna aèonol ala/Tad by ~ them preihualanala car flOP Irceila. "the voehess oh.Ilaeana wry vowplau.eny en ersy have a/act ou, wetted of fteamleo 801010 ca/oath. -SIcwa cut Scbcrba. James 8. Corset the chIldren of these schools wlghs come Into their own, Any hIgher ratIo would be ineffective. rscommaedatloos 11 Class size should not be lurgar than 15 so 22; and where indicated, no larger than 550, fewer. 2) Thu over-all child-adult ratio should oat be greatac thao 12 children to sos proCessIonal adult. class size PAGENO="0553" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1375 administration and supervision The success of this progrem will depeod lergely us the chsracter of the priocipel choseo for eech Effectioe School. To heed esch of these schools successfully, we oeed supervisor who ceo uo dersfsod underprivileged children cod their fsmilies, who is sensitine to their oeeds, problews, esplrsfloos, sod fruesretione; who Is highly shilled io intergroup end interpersonel relellues; who is emutiuselly meture, whose own security is nsf threelened by so eupressiun of di ssgreewest from the faculty, the children, or the cuwwunicy; who believes is his prugrsw strongly enough to resist sny attewpl to wster it down. He wust be a person of genuinely suphisticeled prufessionel etteinments, who beeps sbreest of new denelopwenls in she field of educetlon end relsted disciylines. He should be pens on who csn in spire trust end confidence in the children, the perents, sod she feschers with whow he will work. Once we hens chosen such e principal we wusl nut perwit hiw to he buried in rouline clericel, supply, snd repeir wurb. An adwinistretine assistant should be prunided to insure the principel's freedow to supervise sod 1w prune instru~iuo. flA subuawwilteuuf the buerd of educulian should be desigoeled to eupnrnise this progrew. 21 A ncwwittes consislin g of u psynhietrist ore psychotogtsf, sontototist, end usupern,sor should be chosen to nterntewendtecewwnodprirrcipetsturlhepilofsctruuls, Th~sceweniftaeshoutdsefupcritnrieferchoice, the litht of princ,ples set forth shone. 3) To i esure sympefhetic supernision in lb supper on heluns, she nurse cuwrn,ttes should be cunslttuted eseetun d'eg cuwwittse perrnensetly eneilehie In ussist fhe priocipuls. 4) Ins urge school sysfswthese schools should be desigrefad es eteotehuely eutunuwous school disfrict, cod pieced under the uulhor~fy of e sinels field superioloedent. 5) Luch school should heusen edwintslrutioesssisfunlwhese priwuryiotereslisinlhewuoegewsot espeuts oflhtsprogrew, so free the pnincipul for greeter euylic,pulioe in the educefianeluspectsoflheprugrew. staffing "mere eye tnncseuds neon tnw,ssoda n(derotek, neuuec,.uiue prnyeeewwele urns see toru City sc/root ayste,n. They 5,o styueol,ne eusluet ,`,rcyedluu odds -rca tuetyccllnuel yro5,'eer In the Puulic 3cnuols of hue Turn Cite, hen Turu SIde Educet,ou Deusetureul, raId An eenrawely iwyortenl tector in the teacher's unwillingness tn rewein in sluw schools is the fruslestiog nelure of the tssh under present conditions. Make the conditions such thet reel I eernin g I sseen In be going on, end the flight of teachers 1mw these schools will be renensad. Under ideal conditions we would ask fur the screening of teachers forth esa schools, using the ssme criteria we hene sat down fur principals. However, isis unrealistic to consider restaffing these schools cuwyletely. We should therefore plan on retaining the present staff end rely upon a wide campaign to attract uolunleers elsewhere. Many teachers would be willing to nolunteer it they ware assured that: 1) Viable conditions for teaching were being crested; 2) Provision were wade for genuine par'licipetiun by lbs faculty in the scluliun of the school prublews; 3) Criticism could be wade without fear of retelietiun, cccv in the must subtle form, and 4) Teechers would hens the right at the sod of the first nest to return to their hums schools if, in either their own opinion or that uf the pnincipel, they csnnof work freely, happily, end affecticely wish the child ten snd the community. I) G usruntees should he 5icsn shut `f either princiyel or toucher finds, by the nod of the first ynur. thut the teucher is not suited to worh in this schuol situstion, therewill be u trunsfer, without prsjud'ce. beck fu the hums school ertuenuschoclwith unecencywhichisugreeuhletofhefuechnr. 2) Gusrentees shculd be gtuen thet if, ut the end of the yeur, e,ther teucher or yrtnciyel retnestsutrensfer, thure shell be one, w,Ihuuf prejudice, bucktu the home schont otto eny schuot with enecencywhtchrse0resubletotfrs person *`Iycunlsstel cud tuse essisteuts sea ynsoneucy unclad ,,r rnct,ue clerk.:, Into ,,alue irate essistanta end seen t.telytascneya yoeycctluetesue rust nuctd sell so psu/henred Or lees w'ofaesiocelle ut,sllhed bee' tea CIty, has ToeO Steta Educe/Inn Depsurwent PAGENO="0554" 1376 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS democratic staff invo'vement It a essential thet the steff take en active pert in formulating the direction in which the program shall moue. G enuina mu oloernent of the teechers can result only from the opportunity to help work out ways of nesoluiirg the many professionel issues which face them, e. p., selection of teaching aids, preparation of course materials, utilization of resource personnel, and formulation of plans for individual children. Pa perience has shown that it is essential to set up machinery fo rsuch involvement of the faculty, as partners with the school administration in deuelopin gee effectrue educational program for the children. The assumption of such a role would act ass mejo ninstru ment in further identifying teachers with the school, resulting i neuen greeter loyalty end craatio ity. reoom no en dot ions 1) Teoch ersiceoch school should bn incited to work clesely osith the priccipol in tormototing school poliCy. 2) Prouide time during the school don for conference of te~ohers with other teochers, with odcr,nistrotors, ond With speciolieed personnel. 3) The rot,O of protessionzl personnel to children should be odequote to permit such conferences without deprioieg the children of instrootionol time. PAGENO="0555" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1377 furnishing necessary tools Our schools haue been nnastaruatinn diet nt Sew bnnbs end fewer supplies. The lscb of bnnbs, supplies, and other lum malenals has been anrajor factor n the steady erosion of hush teacher and pupil morale. In the schools in diseduontoged neithborhnods the inuentories tade while the learning deficit piles up. It we are en renerse this pencess, we must it crease the budget to meet unfilled needs, sn as to create cnn ditions which mdl stimulate earning asd attract faculty. There should else be an allowance fur etc in emergencIes, at the discretiuo ef the principaf similar to sums contributed by parents associations tn mere taunted arees. Esploretory teaching materials should he made available to the schools, and curriculum assist ants should be assigned. Moreouer, en orderly flew of supplies to the school, and within the school, must be insured. Tb etc should be reedily auotleble to teachers apon request. relationship of teachers and specialized personnel lit suggested that the "team approach" be applied to the consideration of the relationship betwean the teacher end spacialiaed personoel. The teem concept requires the bringing together of repreoentatioes of related disciplines eapeer relationship, meeting oearegu lar beois, around common problems, with similar goals. Thus, spocialiaed personnel (currico lom coordinators, psychologists, counselors, social worbers, psychiatrists, et al.) should work on a sustained team basis with the teacher, focusing on the potentiel of the group as weIt as the indiuidoel child for furthering the educational goats. Moreover, instead of the traditionel "face-to-face" relationship between the indioiduel child end lb eclinicien (psychologist, social worber, or psychiatrist), the emphasis woo Id be on meeting the child through the counselor end through the teacher, in a supportive, peer reletionship with both. The teem approach woold require time for periodic conferences. Oor program provides sufficient professional personnel to allow conference time without deprioing the 1 Make proolsion ,n rho hud0nt to meet oil the reeds ot ch,ldron end teochors for hooks. ovppi'co. ovdio-o,ovol 2toetopacrotroldeoottortnoocechocls,w:tn,t to neoroosteody tiow ot svypl~oo to rhc pint ncboolo. 31 Treat the school ollot,nent 05cc horgo occovn ollowico tot weekly ord croon d dvi, ocr,ct, w,th rrorthly stotowontsrendorod.tohechockodw,mhtvhocl,onordt. This mill ol'er'note th connors ,dceohic nov ,oh,nh row oo,sts between order and dol,oery. 01 hetop ocootorir each school loreooer,omortoi ttonh~ng oroteriols, irnlud~rn paperback hooks SI ~ school a,doo to erroko reeded s,nppl~ cs ova ,lohie to toanhote at oil times d uriro the on hooi doy. children of instroctioeat time. It also would reqoireerree gieg for supplementary training beyond the professionel-competency cod of the disciplines inooloed. tWe entloipate that one of the outcomes of such a training program would be a "crossing" of traditional lines.) Prooisions for the orientation of school aides most be included in the training program to help insure educationally appropriate utilloetion of their skills. PAGENO="0556" 1378 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS tlPtodesp~ohced pots lotsutticleotnumbots 2) Th etc sheu Id be ot best lull-tIm ouch 400 pupjls ThIs Is hlgha, then thp 200 ,cconn,nonded wjth othc, 01005 ptou~dnd 3) Con pcychaIoglst-soc~el eto,ke,-psych~ot tIst tao ,n to, to, one sch 001. end on tell to, Inc otne,. 5) W,th,n the h oslt st,uc tu,e of the school ptogtuno. educating the malfunctioning child The maltuncttoning pupil is one of the majot facto's tasponsible fot the i neapecienced and t,ansientc hatactet of the staff in the difficult school. By the malfunctioning child we mean the educationally disabled, the socially distuptiue, ot the emotionally distutbad chIld. Theta i staason to helieue that the high incidence of these childtan in slum atea schools is a symptom of the genenal failute to ptouid can apptoptiate educational contest fot these youngstets. This Is not to tgnote, as imponlent ceuss I factots in mslsdsptiue behetiot, the non-school datetminants, but to teotient out expectancies of the schools as out most uiobla insttument in the hoes of these child,en. The ptlmetp cite, thetefota, of out ptogtam tot the malfunctioning child is to place lh enecesse ny maans tot wocking with these youngstets in the hands of the local school, whete contact with a nocmal situation would be maintained, and wham social ties based on mutual tasponsibility ate stten gthened. taco at en cad ot,ons tI P,aeida attectine ctieicul sad aoidoecescepott, ecitttempttesi.eesettittacpoeeducasieaalp~aetete to, the .ohaot statt. 21 Ptotide * thet~eeutic ptagtoet tat the etottoectieeiea chitd, testiec eeastediuidcot cesestudp,heaedaeopaaheaat Intotmotice 0othetad toots educotioeel, ctisicel, guidence,oedtateitiolaootcas. 31 Ptaoidsa hoseitat-coaeactad eediotoic aeteice with opyottooitp tote theteuah phpsioat eaawieotiee tot each moltunctioniso child and e000iaiae tat coetetate tottaw-op. 4lBatuee"JceiotGcid0exeTtack"t5tt05eeci0tctas5~ of distu,hed child tea catetolip atgoaioed 05 oth atepaottc boatat ie aoch at lb ass is heals. s1 Ploe tot g,eatet ieootoetaaot at clieicat-auidoecesetnices eaistio gclussas tat lb assoephosal shild, she weatollp tetatded, th eniacally iwycited, the phpaicallg liwitad, at calms, siace the ooetwhetwieg wejetitp at ohild,es iethtsoetesotpeoflettoowessOcietedawetiaeotPtoblams. PAGENO="0557" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS 1379 6) lrrnnry wore ente,rs, ur nduyet,orrul opportunities by prou~rlirgetter-snheelund eningrecrti.progrurys per sod clter.snhurr) study cud rurrred,ulleuil,t,es wkerrduntie~t~errdrnrrrnrye,rrppenie~ns turbuth uhildren cud purents. llMukeuulirrrccIundcourrsel~rrqproqrurnrr~ndutrt,yfn, stutu hospitul ruturrryes, desrgned to prourde eppropr,ute screenrrrq end pluuerrrunt huture return to school. rdstuirdtulluw.up 0) Pruu,de other plunemr,r) lec,l,),es Icr those ch,ldryrr who urn found, etteruceretu) ecelrrutien bycl,n,cru,rsu,,d edu toes, to be so disturbed cud dueiuqrd unto Ire ,,cuble to prnht from e rcqrrlur schnul prnyrrrir,. involving the community and its resources Schools must guard against isolation from fhe community. We dare no) encourage fhe cu)fora) elierafion which has creefed, between disednenfeged chi)d ran end fheir parerfs, such tragic hostility, directed bofh at fhemseluss and society. The immediate school community must be mobilized for bootstrap operation. This entai)s using faders), state, municipa), and neighborhood resources to pronide ton satisfying patterns of )ife end work. More eetensiue opportunities fur perents, neighburs, end school personnel to meet at home end in school, to be espused to each other's personalities and aspirations, might lead tue mutuality of understanding end trust which is basic for etfectius education. Enery neighborhood now has sonic) sgencles of all kinds that ste working in isoleliun and euen, perheps, st cross purposes with one en other. These agencies, including the public school, should be coordinated into comprehensine neighborhood plan. should be intimetely innnlued in the deuelnpment end implementetion of the plan. Unless the school and the school bnsrd are not only willIng tosnnept cnitinism withnut becoming defeesine, but enen to take the lead in eopnsing the insdequsnies of uue school system, there will be no genuine inunlnement on the pert of the parents end the community. Local lesdership groups, especially the local school board, PAGENO="0558" 1380 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS t) Tho heel shonid f ,I,tatcf,cqiant ncefingc of pirrentn aedschcol pncs,,rl,inddeallydnallgrci'pn. 2)Theschoolshccldtaherhcldinde'iopinqa 3)Theboardotedetionshoald Ioadershipcnprchinq cooperation of tnachnr and cor rienity grncpc and a) The board of ndiccat,cn nhoctd ncra qi: 9, qoaernments, and from peoatc fcnndar'nnn integrating effective schools In approaching the question of the so-celled "difficult to steff' schools, we must recognize that most of them fell into this category because they are de facto segregated schools, reflecting the problems end coils of the ghetto that feeds them. As we worh toward upgrading these schools, we must, simultaneously, worh toward integrating them. Otherwise, we are worbing toward tha creation of good segregated schools. Such schools, how euer successful, are still handicapped by the problems inherent i nsegregetion, end theresu Its, for tescher end pupil cube, a re neuer as g rest as they would be without the handicap of segregetion. Therefore, the following recommendations are submitted in the subject- areas under consideration: ttosrzdistncring,reaonins.and newconstructionprocezd, under this plan, prioritp nonsidoration must be qmnn to the pessibilitins at achmnnins the greatnst possrbln degrnn of phpstcal dnsesrnsatiun ot the stcdnnt bodies ot all the sohools atteotnd. 2f One ot the sermoas problems of our sn5reqatnd spstnm todap is that children spldonr bane the opportenitp to sen members of minordp qrocps in socralt pacce ptahln positrons of authority. The minoritp group child nends this eepennncn roaidmerhncreatienottnnlinssotsntt.msrth, and rho idnntiticatioo with authorrtp ti~crns. The child of rho so-nailed majonly musf h ann sac h cop erurn an impodant mnqredientin the tormahen of pohrrmenraftrnr than negation arrilades toward fhosn who are dittnrnnf from himself. Thnrntnrp. d is important hat aconsc etlod be made rn integrate rho staff at all 3) The dnseqratnd srudenr bodp and staft wifi not produce the desired result in terms of an integratnd nducationat eepnneneeunlnssrhecurccclumandrnachinsnratnnals reflect both the historical contnbutionh and the dap-to-dap padicipation in ocr coniply of all groups. bach mat errals are acarlabie, and th nnneehsarp cc Ira ehorr nest ho enpnndndloacquirn them hmapbeadorsablefosetcPa special curriculum eonnm,ttnn, which miii include teachers, similar to the cemmirron on staffing, t ornconrmend and supnrnrsn rhereguiredchanses. PAGENO="0559" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1381 F75T~ to ciaw of pastalicoation of school aad cornirvunily ri minority groaparoas, this it an especially iorportaot and saesiticaarea otcoacern .ftmillbeirnpontaotto guaract.. Shot those people so the staff ash oare isa oWed easy way in cornarceify cootacf he properlyaod thoroughly prepared, through ie.tercicetraining cocrses, sperial workshops ho mao ralatioot, of cetera, prior toasts eriog their duties. ti. important, also, that the conmmnueify he mell.infurered and incolvedfrorrrfhuhegieningiofhechanges heivg made aod the reasons fortheem. Such eftontafo inform and pr.pareteaahens, supemnitors,acdthacomnmnunityshould also ha i naugunaled is those areas is hich schools with fewer prohleems are located. A `S~~' providing for on-going evaluation and adjustment of the program As in She case of any responsihla part of the school system, it is reasonable to aopecf that thene will he peniodic evaluations of the curriculum, program, mathods, relation to othen parts of the school system, at caters. Wa recognize the necassity for building into lhase schools, from their inception, the parsonnel and funds needad for the coolinuous study and evaluation of th a entire program by a body other than the one administering the program. This is so essential prerequisite for the careful accumulation of tha materials necessary for a sound evaluation. Iris asaeotial that what is done hare thou Id ba reported to the appropriate professional and official bodies. racowmcodationa 1) Provide research apacialisfe from an outside agency tar the schools, to formulate and apply appropriate research criteria fortha evaluation of the program. 2) Make appropriate adjustments hosed upon these evaluations. PAGENO="0560" 1382 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS estimate of additional costs for the first step Budgetary appropriations kane been tar betow the minimum needs of our school systems year after year. tn order to make up the hecklo~ end make a new start in our btighted urban education areas, we must recognize that tremendously increased efforts end esperditures witl be necessary. The hudget must make adequate prouision for teeckers, clessrovms, books, supplies, and the continuing development of know-how. Additional classrooms, demounteble units, temporary housing, structural changes in the buildings selected for the program, costs of bussing children to underutilized schoots, eli of which measures may be necessary to reduce the populetiors of the selected schools to teesible proportions, would have to be provided for from the cepitel budget or bther sources. There are too many variables to permit en estimate. It is yossibte that in some schools no edditioret costs for these purposes would arise. concluding statement This design for Effective Schools should be considered tentative end minimal. Tb era are importert areas left out: eerty chitdhood education, emphasizing the new devetopwents In yre-kindergsrter end bindergerter educetior; teacher training tor urban educetion; en or-going steff retraining program; orientation of staff; recruitment; use of staff, - evetuetion, finencing, etcetera. ft is the hope of the committee, some of whose members hetped to design the basic New York City Pier, that each school system may find the yroposed AFT design of some value in developing its own program to fit its specific locet needs. Ore tect must be recognized by all concerned with the plight ot American urber educetivr: the time for ceretully planned end asserted action to improve our vrbsn schoots is row. We cannot snd dare rot wait. Ths tsstativa so wwary repers is based targety es the ptae draws up by ths Uzited Fedaraties at Teachers oed which was she prototype tsr the More Effective Soheets progress row is operatioc ie New York City isOt etsssestary soheets. Addifieral atemsetary scheets witi ass this prc5ram is tetere ysars. The New York City erosraw for Mesa Effective Schosts was draws ap by a icist csrsssit5ee ceesistisg of as eqeal samberot rsprssssfatines from the Office at the Superistesdest at Schools, the Usifsd Faderatios at Teachers (AFT), cod the Cozecit at Sapsreicery Asseciafioss. This committee was officially appsiotsd by the school scperistssdssttv stody the proposals weds by ths UFT. Av chasges, improesmacts, ard ths isctosios of masy siasificast specifics had to be aces pfabts to all these cospsratisggreaps.Th500mmittsscossetfedszithasdsoosht adcicefrommasyorgasizatisssasdteadars ic lb eareas asdsr cossidseafies. PAGENO="0561" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1383 Th~ Eff~t,~ S~h~,Is ~ ~ *~h~I-by-s~h~I ~ th~ ~ ~ b~t th~~ ~ q,~d~lIy th&t th~, ~ k I~,t. ~ddit~ th ~ ~ ~ ~ Th~ Ett~tj~ S~h~Is P'~g~~ p~t~y ~ b~t ~t ~II ps~t~;yd~~t sh~Id b~ ,,I~d~d ~ thiS h~di~q. Th~ Eff~~ti~ S~h~&s ~ ~ ~ ~ *~II t,~I y@ff@~t~~ -S~~ B~&gI, ~ ~ ~ Eff~~t~'~ S~h&s F 1$ 75-492 0-67-pt. 2-36 PAGENO="0562" 1384 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDIJCATION AMENDMENTS THE QUALITIES OF A MORE EFFECTIVE SCHOOL In Nem York City) A More Eff.ctas School is qaal~tatinsiy different from othar comparable schools because contains tha follocing teaching end ieernlrg conditions: * A school register oI 1000 * Class registers *ith a arm of $3. Kcrderganten and p,n.klndergalter classes hece a enlalmam of IS cith tcO licensed teachers acellable. * Each groapofthreeclasses has en additional teacher oho is part of Iha claster of the three class.s (Cluster Teacher) She isaclasstoonr tsacher cho shares equally Ir the resporsibilltiss of the dusts' ard procldss thacocerageeO that each teacher ir the cluster may hacea daily praparstion perIod. She is an orgeric part of the dlaster tserrr. freqaertly teaching In the classroorrr cIth one of the other teacheta. * School secretarIes era p roolded orr the ratIo of orra full-tIme secretary for scary 250 chlldrer. * Schoolgaidancecoarselors era procided on the ratio of o ra f or ecery 350 ch Id rer. a OTPs lOther Teach~rg Posit~ons)srsproc~ded,rna~rly totrsinardcorh asatesnrodh classroom teachsrs. The OTPteacherrtprograrnmed to corb *ilh indicldaal children or s nra II g rca ps to ass 1st the classroom teacher by prodding the semdices end the techniqaas as sach may be needed and to csrry Oat other fanctlonsas outlined in their job analysis programs. * Teacher Aids time by parants is prodded on the ratIo of one hoar par 4*y per 20 chIldren to fre, teachers from non-teaching * Special fands for additional sapplias, sboee chat is badgetsd for the regular schools, are slloend on the ratio of $25 for each child. A yearly special contingency fund ii prodded on the ratio of $3.50 per pupil. This fund any be a sad as the need a of tha school decalop. A fall-rims psychologIst. social workat, uttandenca teacher, health counselor, commu nmty coordinator. end speech therapist are assigned to each Mere Effectica School. A psychiatnist~s prooldsd on rhesarnebasisoforaforeech fear ME Schools. Additional msdicalenddental sancices ens proalded. The MES Ptogramrm is tryln~ to obtain from the Health Department a fall-time medical and dental * Money has been set aside for teachsr orientation before the opening of an MES school. Sach training Is also prodded da ring the sch 00) ~ * Weeklyconference tlmels prodded, during schoel hours, for cluster and grsde ree.tlngs. *Sapenoleoreareoflered specie) saminers )darirrg school hours) by colleges as oppor- tunities to eachanga Ideas, nosluete practices. end eooloe nec approaches to auperolsion and tsschlng In More Effectlos Schools. The prIncIpals of th. ME Schools meat monthly one seminar basis, so that some renga of acceptable ooer-alI school management, super- cisior, end administralion gaidalinee may be developed for such ME Schools, based on honest democratic inoolcament of the total staff ss outlIned In the orIginal plan. a Each ME School is petmitted a great deal of latitude and opportunity for a fluid fleaible approach to school and class orgsnizatlon, largely to be determIned by the specIfIc na.ds end dnoelopment In each of the schools. * Thatotl cost per chIld fat tha abeoe lmprooemnsnts Is estImated to be about $215. ha Ic lire y,ed,l of Nec Yyrl C~ly hal lu ndcc~el,ocal uclhc,il,ec adcplnd lh~ abccn plu~r ,r 964 Thnreu,eocu' ecccgh od,ceo Ic pc~cl Ic Ihe c(th,u prmcgrmn ir redudicm, ,r u~hcciard ir teacher, pupil, mmd pureolmomale:u'rd~o greater ccanmurily~'mlmeolarrd p~nlhr~palmcO good Intentions are not enough NeIther Is a mere recognition of the probleme facing our deteriorating public schOol systems. There must be a collectiv, will to do something to solve our .dacational probeims. Such collective will must be created, organized, vitalized and directed by concerned, knowledgeabl. dedicated community leaders representing all segments of the community. Such event must take place to the end that Effective Schools will exist for all children, especially for the underprivileged. Now is the time to organize and fight for such schools. Delay is unthinkable Chs,ias 0 SmIth. Jr. PAGENO="0563" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1385 PAGENO="0564" 1386 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. BIEMILLER. We very much appreciate again the opportunity to come and consult with this committee. We have long admired the work of this committee in which you have made a significant role, Mr. Chairman, and I want to emphasize for the newer members, our staff people in either our educational or legislative departments are always available for either consultation with committee staff, with individual members, or in any way we can be helpful. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much. You have been very helpful to many of the members and to the staff who have called on your people for technical assistance. We thank you. Our next witnesses are rather well-known w-itnesses who have been here over a period of years on behalf of impacted legislation. Our panel witnesses are: Oscar Rose, superintendent of schools, Mid- west City, Okia.: R. E. Hood, superintendent of schools, Brunswick, Ga. : Richard Taylor, superintendent, Widefielci School, Colorado Springs, Cob.: John W. Eater, superintendent of schools, Rantoul, Ill.: T. Olai Hageness, superintendent, Clover Park schools, Tacoma, Wash. : William Simmons, deputy, superintendent of schools, Detroit, Mich.: J. M. Hanks. superintendent. Ysleta School District, El Paso, Tex. Do we have all you gentlemen p1~esent Mr. ROSE. Ies, sir. STATEMENTS OF OSCAR ROSE, SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, MID- WEST CITY, OKLA.; R. E. HOOD, SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, BRUNSWICK, GA.; RICHARD TAYLOR, SUPERINTENDENT, WIDE- FIELD SCHOOL, COLORADO SPRINGS, COLO.; JOHN W. EATER, SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, RANTOUL, ILL.; T. OLAI HAGE~ESS, SUPERINTENDENT, CLOVER PARK SCHOOlS, TACOMA, WASH.; WILLIAM SIMMONS, DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, DETROIT, MICH.; J. M. RANKS, SUPERINTENDENT, YSLETA SCHOOL DISTRICT, EL PASO, TEX. Chairman PERKINS. I notice, Mr. Ford, Mr. Meeds and any other gentlemen who have a superintendent here can introduce these various members, but in my judgment we will be real late this afternoon before we receive the testimony of all witnesses. I)oni anybody get discouraged and leave because we are going to hear the National School Board Association and the American Book Publishers, the commissioner of education from the State of Michi- gan. the chairman for ~\1anchester, Mass. W~e are going to hear all of the witnesses toda and other witnesses who are present even though we may run until T or 8 oclock tonight, so stay with us and bear with us. Do all of the gentlemen who accompany you have statements Mr. ROSE. All but one and his is in the mail coming up here. Chairman PERKINS. Without objection, all of those statements will be insertedi in the record and, in order to expedlite the hearing, I hope that we can refrain from questioning until all members of this panel make their statements and then we will recess about. 1~ :~0 or 1~ :40 PAGENO="0565" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1387 and come back about 1 :30 at which time we will call on Mr. Ford to come up here and preside. I think we can get. through without any difficulty this afternoon, but. there will be no limiting of anyone in their questioning. Just bear with us and after we get. around the 5-minute rule, there will be no limitation. I will stay with you until late in the afternoon. Mr. ROSE. Mr. Chairman, I was going to make this comment. As I look at all of the names up here, I believe there are only three gentle- men here who were here when I first. test.ified before this particular committee of the Congress, and that is you, Mr. Ayres, and I. Chairman PERKINS. Did I see Mr. Hood here? Mr. RosE. Yes, he is here, Mr. Chairman. I might say, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate too, Mr. Ford, that we will be permitted to come back this afternoon and subject ourselves to any questions that our testimony might. have raised before the distin- guished members of this committee. I probably will not read all of my testimony because I am certain that you can do it. I only hope that you will. With reference to the distribtuion of the panel, you can see from the identification where they come from and the jobs in which they are engaged. In selecting the panel members to appear before your committee, Mr. Chairman, I have tried to get superintendents from different States rather widely distributed throughout the Nation in order that our total presentation might. be national in scope and that we might be able to give more satisfactory answers to questions concerning edu- cational needs within the several States. This will in turn give some realistic idea of how various Federal funds fit into the total educa- tional budgets necesary in the federally impacted school districts. The Oklahoma per capita cost for operation according to the State department of education was $411.61 fiscal year 1966. Without Public Law 874 funds the Midwest City School District, whic.h is the fourth largest. school program in the State, had a maximum of only $310 per pupil with which to purchase. an education. Knowing t.hat this financial disparity exists in many, many schools heavily impacted by Federal activity has motivated my interest, throughout the years in this legislation. Certainly it has ben a rewarding experience to have the privilege of appearing before the House Education Committee in support of legislation every year for almost 20 years. You have been most kind and considerate toward this problem, and your action has resulted in the impact area schoolchildren having a decent educational opportunity. Some fundamental principles with which I believe every super- intendent appearing here this morning would agree are as follows: 1. The children in impact area schools are entitled to an educa- tional program comparable to that in other schools within the State or area, provided the local citizens assume a maximum local tax effort in order to maintain such an educational program. Further, they are opposed to the use of Public Law 874 funds for the purpose of re- clucing the effort necessary by the local citizens within the tax pattern of the State. 2. They believe that the local educational program has a direct value in accomplishing the objectives and goals of the various Federal PAGENO="0566" 1388 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS activities which cause the problem the same as in the case of privately owned taxable industries. Since it has been in the Federal Govern- ments interest, as well as essential to the national economy to dis- tribute its activities throughout all States of the Nation, the educa- tional programs of the schools serving them should have at least some national aspect rather than being completely limited by State or local educational standards. 3. We stand ready to assist in accomplishing any modifications of this legislation which will help it do a better job without doing vio- lence to these fimclamental principles. The following tabulations of 1966 fiscal data from the 10 largest city school districts in Oklahoma which educate approximately 40 per- cent of the pupils in the State will serve to illustrate the application of these principles in actual operation. One of the gentlemen here this morning mentioned the tremendous turnover in the school system heavily impacted with Federal activities. Therefore, children coming from many States of the Ullion are necessary to carry on the work of the Federal activity. They have to have a feeling that their children are going to have at least a minimum standard of education that the Federal Government would be in favor of. I mention these fundamental principles because the impact area legislation in some quarters has been somewhat criticized, and with these I don~t think anyone call disagree and we stand ready to help establish them in support of this program that has done so much. Now, I give on a tabulation here which I will mention which ohows these 10 largest city school distncts in Oklahoma. (The tabuhit ion follows :) TABULATION I Now, as von can see, I ask the question: Caii the school children of the inipact area school districts expect an educational program corn- parable to other schools within the State without the continuation of Public Law S74 It will he noted that the this group are in ~th anti pupil without Public Law cOflclllSiOll is to answer tile enee to a large segment of ]fa.rini unt operating funds arailahlc from it iglt to low without Public Law 874 fun (1.5 Funds per Funds per Schoob pupil with- pupil from out Public I'ublic Law Law 874 874 1. Ponca City $460.35 0 2. Bartlesville 438.33 (1 3. Enid 434.28 20.56 4. Tulsa 431.04 8.28 5. Norman 399.09 15.61 0. Oklahoma City 391.92 17.33 7. Putnam city 386.88 10.74 ~. Lawton 382.41 77.34 9. Muskogee 373.85 11.30 10. Midwest City 310.00 79.91 Normal total maximum funds $460. 35 438. 33 455. 48 439. 32 417.70 409. 26 397. 62 459. 75 385. 15 389. 91 ESEA funds per pupil $18.97 11.82 21. 40 20. 27 16.81 28. 81 2.15 22. 99 55. 14 4.75 two most heavily lml)act aided schools in 10th place as far as funds available per 8T4 funds are concerned. Thus, tile only above quest ion in tile negative with refer- the school children in Oklahoma. While PAGENO="0567" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1389 all but two of these schools receive some Public Law 874 funds, it is obvious that the percentage varies materially. The two which do not receive Public Law 874 funds are Nos. 1 and 2 in total local revenues available with which to purchase au education program. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 contemplates that the funds provided under it will be used to improve the educa- tional opportunity for disadvantaged children. Thus, it cannot be thought of as taking the place of other available funds such as those received under Public Law 874. This tabulation show-ing ESEA funds along with total other local, State, and Federal will serve to indicate the result should Public Law 874 be discontinued because of cnaction and funding of ESEA. 2. Does Federal activity effect the educational tax base (value of taxable property per pupil) of the impact~ area school district. (Tabulation II follows:) TABULATION 11.-Assessed ~valuation per pztpil in each school district Valuation Valuation School per pupil School per pupil Ponca City $7, 031 Putnam City $4, 927 Bartlesville 5, 723 Lawton 2, 530 Enid 5, 052 Muskogee 3, 830 Tulsa 0, 845 Midwest City 2, 246 Norman 4, 372 Aggregate 10 schools 5, 388 Oklahoma City 5, 555 Aggregate Oklahoma 5, 596 Again we find the taxable value per pupil to support education locally places these schools in almost the reverse order as the Federal funds received under tabulation I. The most heavily impact. area schools, Lawton and Midwest City, have by far the least taxable value per pupil of the 10-school group. This directly results from the tax- exempt value within the respective school districts. It has been raised that ESA funds could take the place of the im- pacted area funds. I threw in that column and I am sure you can find that each of these tw-o wonderful pieces of legislation do and are de- signed to do a different job. Mr. ALBERT. May I interrupt just a minute, Mr. Chairman. This; is my first appearance as a mernl)er of this committee.. I had hoped I would get here in time to present Mr. Rose. I do w-ant to say lie is one of the distinguished leaders in the education world in m:~ State. He comes from a Midwest~ City school that has probably had more grow-mg pams w-ith education pi~oblems than any school in our part of the country. Right now he is Congressman ,John Jarman's constituent. I do not have the honor of representing him but he~ has done a great job for all of the school districts of Oklahoma. and particularly those in every district of our State. that has had difficulties due to expansions resulting from military and other governmental activities. I am very pleased to see him here. He is a friend of mine and has been for many years, is well informed on the issues in which he is interested, and I know that the committee will receive a Tot of valuable, information from his testimony. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for recognizing me. Mr. FORD. Thank you, Mr. Albert. I have enjoyed no end the honor of being in the chair when the distinguished majority leader has made his appearance on the floor, as he. announced a~ he was introducing Mr. Rose, he is the newest member of this committee and will be PAGENO="0568" 1390 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDIJCATION AMENDMt~NTS sitting with this committee in consideration of the legislation that is now before us. We on the committee are, of course, honored by his ~ not only because. he is the majority leader, but. also, as those of us who have had a chance to work with him know, because he is a strong supporter of education. I can only say with the combination of Oscar Rose and the majority leader working on this legislation, education in Oklahoma has no prol)lem. Mr. RosE. Thank you. Mr. ALBERT. I thank my distinguished colleague. Mr. FORD. I have been keeping my eye on you since you have been working around the Hill, but I did not think you were going to start packing this committee. Mr. ROSE. I will do anything to help education. Let's put it that wa. I also have a tabulation there which shows the valuation per pupil in each of these 10 districts. Again, it shows for the tax-exempt Federal pi~opei~ty which, in a sense, is a prima1~ basis for the original enact- ment of this legislation and also for its continuation it. will show that two impact area school districts are far below the others and I will hasten to say this is not because of low assessments in those two places because they have nothing to (10 with their assessments in the State of Oklahoma. Oklahoma has a State equalization board and, therefore, the percent- age of assessment is very uniform. It may be too low and our levies may l)e too high. Frankly, we (10 have a policy of low assessments and high levies but it. gets the same amount of money if you had high assessments and low levies. I will now refer you to the tal)ulat ion on page 5. (Tabulation III follows :) TABULATION III Since the tax levied represents the only factor over which local citizens have control it is a direct index to the effort made at the local level. Total ta~ levied for educational purposes Schools (in mills) Ponca City 38. 22 Bartlesville ~°. ~ Enid 37. 00 Tulsa 39.92 Norman 47.26 Oklahoma City 38.43 Putnam City 43.70 Lawton 31. 96 Muskogee 38.60 Midwest City 53. 79 It will be noted that the total effort. (tax levy) ranges from 31.96 mills to 53.79 mills for educational purposes. Again we find tremen- dous variation in the effort made among these 10 large school districts. However, it. is pointed out that the school district receiving the greatest. percentage from Public Law 874 funds makes the greatest effort. Thus we find little or no evidence that the receipt of Public Law 874 funds by school districts reduces its local effort. in support of its school program. On September 30, less thaii 3 weeks after it was proposed, this im- pacteci area school voted that It) mills and used it and still had consid- PAGENO="0569" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1391 erably less funds with which to buy an education thaii the schools not federally impacted. I will turn over then to one other statement which I think is worthy of my emphasizing. It is my understanding that each time the Con- gress has authorized its membership, and it has done that a number of times (luring the 17 years of this legislation, to make a task force study or to observe on-the-spot. conditions they have found the im- pact area schools not only needed the funds presently provided under Public Law 874 but in many instances they find that even w-ith them these school districts are financed on a basis far below the school dis- tricts not. aflected 1w tax-exempt Federal activities. Due to spiraling costs and other Federal assistance, very little of which goes to the heavily impacted school district, I believe that. if this legislation is not extended or if the funds from it are reduced it will result. in the deterioration of the 1)1ese1~t school programs to a disparity greater than that which they faced prior to 1950. This fact which is w-ell knowii by the Congressmen regarding the schools in their ow-n congressional (liStricts has had much more influence in establish- ing their position in support of this legislation with full funding than what. might be termed political pressures applied by the local school superintendents or citizens. They know first. hand that. any other course of action w-ihl result only in a poorer educational opportunity for the children in these school districts located within their own congressional districts. Since the school district, in which I administer an educational pro- gram received an average of only $51,445 under title I and an average of only $36,087 under title II of the Elementary and Secondary Edu- cation Act. of 1965, I cannot. speak from much experience with ref- erence to the value of this legislatioii during these 2 years. However, I have read with a great deal of interest and pride the testimony of the Commissioner of Education presented to you on last March 2. I think it. was a very fine progress report on the accomplishments achieved through legislation designed to improve the educational program for the disadvantaged child as well as to encourage a more daring al)proach in attacking other educational problems for all the children of both the public and private schools of America. I testified before this committee supporting this bold and innovat- ing approach to improve American education each of the last 2 years, and I am especially proud that the favorable experience of "Impact Area Legislation" w-hich I had worked for during the preivous 15 years could make a contribution to this massive infusion of Federal funds into another area of dire need in the total educational respon- sibility to all children. However, I was disappointed that his testi- mony did not likewise mention the continued progress and contribu- tion to the education program of over one-third of the children of America through Public Law- 874 and 815. I feel these public laws are due much credit for their own accomp- lishment as well as serving as a vehicle for the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. I also want to commend the Commissioner for offering amend- ments to further perfect the operation of the six titles of the Ele- mentary and Secondary Education Act title of this legislation. I can find no fault with his proposed amendments as embodied in H.R. 6230. PAGENO="0570" 1392 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1-lowever, I would ~ additional amendments to Public Law 874 and Public. Law 815 titles of this legislation as follows: 1. The extension of Public Law 815 for either 1 or 2 years as intro- duced respectively by Mr. Perkins, chairman of this committee under H.R. 3649, and by Mr. William P. Ford, a. member of this committee, under H.R. 6118. As evidence of the need for a further extension of Public Law 815 I am including a tabulation showing the applica- tions filed by States as of the first. cutoff date-February 20, 1967- under the 1-year extension of this legislation approved by the 89th Congress. This information was received from the State departments of education of all 50 States and shows that 329 applications were filed from 43 States of the 50 States with a total Federal funds requested in the amount of $176,929,000. I dealt with the various State depart- ments of education and had excellent cooperation. The U.S. Office of Education will have one more cutoff date, June 30, 1967, under this extension, and I am sure thata great number of other applicants will at that time establish entitlements in addition to those shown in this tabulation. Certainly we can expect. that. if the entitlements under Public Law 815 have reached this extent during the current. fiscal year that there will be a further continuing justifiable need in the 1 or 2 years im- mediately following. Unless this legislation is extended for another I or 2 years. the Federal Government will have no legislation under which it can meet its responsibility for constructing facilities in the impact. area school districts. Then I have a tabulation showing the number of applicants and the Federal funds requested. (Tabulation referred to follows :~ The following is a tabulation of the applications under Public Law 815 school construction) filed in the various States as of the recent cutoff date, February 20, 1967. This information was sent to me at my request from the various State departments of education. States reporting. 50: States filing applications. 43; States without applica- tions, 7. Number Federal State of funds State of funds applicants requested applicants requested Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California 5 5 11 S 63 52,555,900 H Nevada 2 5,273,664 New Hampshire 1 4,S50.841 New Jersey 6 1,242,140 New Mexico 10 42,357.680 New York 1 North Carolina 2 $2,832,500 50,000 3,625,673 8,533,044 150,000 2,050,640 Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa ~. Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusettc Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska 10 o 0 4 ~ 3 6 17 2 6 7 3 4 3 5 1 5 0 6 11 1 1 5,717.360 0 North Dakota 4 0 Ohio 7 4,357,000 Oklahoma 24 7,726,805 Oregon 0 10,330,928 Pennsylvania 854,812 Rhode Island 2 3,615,408 South Carolina 4 260,000 South Dakota 4 862,950 Tennessee 3 1,323,780 Texas 37 1,260,450 Utah 4 2,349,760 H Vermont 0 107,000 \irginia 9 15,140,600 H Washington 13 2.000, 000 West Virginia 0 1,235,000 Wisconsin 4 Oy Wyoming 3 2,500,000 H 1,932,580 Total,50 States 34,000 (43 with appli- 815,455 H cations) 329 1,250,000 1,660,000 5,023,306 0 726,000 1,451,356 1,756,500 154,000 12,140,000 3,516,000 0 9,240,350 3,382,833 0 488,950 193,835 ~ 176,929,000 PAGENO="0571" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1393 Mr. RosE. Mr. Albert, and members of tins committee, I am in- trigued to find out. l)ecause I think if I made a contribution to edu- cation it has been by informing tile various Congressmen through their constituents of just what tile need is iii education. It is their responsibility then to decide what they want to (10 ~ll)out it, J)llt I l)lillI in the next. ~ weeks to be al)le to tell any Congressman on this committee or in the Congress how much of this construction IS ill his own con- gressional (listrict. Then when lie has that iiiforiiiatioii lie may choose to support a supplemental appropriation or next years appropriation, or whatever he wishes to do about it. It is not a ii~u~~ operation whatever: it is au information operat ion. W'iiile I recognize, this committee has 110 (ii rect resl)onsibilitv for appropriations I would like to call your attention to the fact that only a~)proximately $~3 million was appropriated by the $~)tii Congress to fund the applications under the 1-year extension enacted through the efforts of this committee. Thus, I would encourage you to use any influence, you may have to Prevail on the menibers of the Health, Education, and Welfare Appropriations Subcommittee, urging them to give careful consideration to financing a sluI)stantial part of the present entitlements under the extensioii of Public Law 815 as enacted by the Congress under your leadership. School facilities are absolutely essential if the legislation being considered here today is to make the maximum contnbut ion possible to the educational programs in the. immediate future. The school acimin- istrators of the schools filing applications hope to appear l)efore this subcommittee in behalf of a. supplemental aI)propriation for Public Law 815 at. an early date in order that tlìe construction of the most urgently needed and planned facilities may be completed early in fiscal year 1968. Likewise a supplemental appropriation is necessary if those applicants who became eligible for entitlements due to this commit tee reducing the qualifying requirements of Public Law 874 (luring the 89th Congress. \Ve solicit your help for supplemental apj)ropriations in both of these areas. In support of amenclmeuits to "I)isaster authority in Public Law- 874 and 815" the. Commissioner made two suggestions ill appendix H, which I think might be applicable iii a more general way to these two public laws as follows: WTith reference to extensioii of this authority lie SIli(l Authority to provide disaster assistance under Public Laws 815 and 874 should be extende(I until June 30, 1972. The i-year extension is necessary in order to give continuity to the program. He did not mention anything about Mr. Perkins' suggestion to extend Public Law 874 itself until l9T~. While I agree with the Commissioner's suggestion, I seriously doubt that this particular provision of this legislation is more important. to American education than Public Law $15 and $74. Thus, I would not only favor the Commissioner's recommendation but strongly urge the committee to give, serious consideratioii to extending 1)0th public laws even longer than the 1 or 2 years suggested previously in my testimony. PAGENO="0572" 1394 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Regarding the preselit. level and limitations of disaster assistance under Public Law 874, the Commissioner says- The phrase "during the last full fiscal year" would be eliminated from section 7 of Public Law S74. This section authorized Federal assistance on a continuing basis to finance a school program equivalent to that maintained the last full year prior to the disaster. This is not practical, because school programs are improving each year. I totally agree to the. elimination of this restrictive level of assistance. Likewise. I would ask that the committee consider removing or chang- ing a. similar but much more damaging and limiting i ovision for determining the rate of payment under section 3 of Public Law 874. The rate under tins section is presently determined from fiscal data of the second preceding ear, which is even more inequitable thaii the restriction. "during the last full year" in section 7 of the law. Fifteen years ago when the education for a pupil was being pur- (based for approximately ~100 in many States, and even less than $100 in nianv States, and was not increasing at any rapid pace this restric- I ion to section 3 ~ayme1~ts under Public Law 874 pose no particular prol)lem. However, when education is iiow averaging over $400 per pupil and increasing by ~ or $20 per year in many States, a 2-year lag iii the. fiscal data used in determining funds available places the schools depending on Federal impact money in a very disadvantageous posit ion insofar as providing a normal education is concerned. A great. many of the schools of Oklahoma. voted the extra 10 mils last ear and many voted this year: vet it will be 2 years before that figure will be. involved in what part the local contribution rate the Federal Government. will pay because of this 2-year lag. Whieii the "second previous year" restriction was included in Public Law 814. it was thought that the fiscal data w-ould not l)e available for use the year following which is hot, the case at the present time with the 1)resent methods of accounting. I believe all fiscal data for the previffils ear is available well in advance of final payment for the current year. The F.S. Office of Education regulation 1)ermits a~)plications to be filed prior to March 31) of the current year which is 9 months after the close of the J?reviolls year. Certainly this fiscal data is available in all cases prior to final pay- iiients which is well over a. year from the beginning date of the cur- rent year. I would certainly suggest. that the Commissioner's con- (lusioll that this is not practicable because school programs are im- proving each year" is just. as basically sound for section 3 in Public Law 874 as it. is to section 7. Especially (10 I urge consideration of an amendment. of Public Law 874 modifying the plan of determining the rate of payment Since the adoption of the amendment. by the 89th Congress which determines the rate of payment by "school grouping" within a State ra.ther than by comparable schools. I believe that the most equitable correction of this inequity in determining rates is to eliminate the 1-year lag in the fiscal data used. However, if this cannot be done, I would suggest that the effective date of the amendment enacted during the 89th Con- PAGENO="0573" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1395 gress, requiring that rate of payments be based upon grouping similar schools within a State, be either eliminated or further deferred until June 30, 1968. I think some real work should be done in this rate of payment part of the legislation. I do not think there is only one way of doing it., but I think it. should have a real good look at it by the Congress. Another way that impact area schools might avoid serious loss of funds under Public Law 874 which are absolutely essential might be through providing that no applicant would receive a lower rate of payment under section 3 than it had received the previous year. This would allow for an orderly adjustment to any new method of cal- culating the rate of payment without seriously reducing the funds available to purchase an educational program. In conclusion, I would like to offer my support to Mr. Pucinski's bill H.R. 6558- To consider children living in federally assisted public housing as federally connected children for purposes of educational assistance to federally impacted area~. Under many of the low-rent housing programs financed under the Federal Housing Act of 1937, a school district, can be completely overrun with children in a very short. time with no compensating tax base to provide for their education. Such low-rent. housing is badly needed, and yet if it must be obtained through sacrificing the educa- tion of the children involved, there is a grave question as to its ultimate value. After long years of experience with this committee, I have every confidence that the legislation you report. to the Congress w-i]l be well thought out and ultimately enacted by the U.S. Congress. I thank you for the Opportunity of being a part. of this effort to improve Ameri- can education in both public and private schools. Do you want me to present the other witnesses, Mr. Ford? Mr. Foim. Thank you, Mr. Rose. Before you do that, I would like to afford the gentleman from Washington the opportunity of introducing a guest he noted in the group. Mr. MEEDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It. is a real pleasure to welcome l)efore this committee again and to conimenci to this com- mittee's consideration one of our very, very capable school adminis- trators from the State of Washington, Mr. T. Olai Hageness, who is superintendent of a heavy mipact district. Mr. Hageness has been in that. district for a miiimber of years, has met the problems which confront. educators in his position in a heavily impacted area with its higli turnover rate and low tax valuation rate, has met the challenges of education in that district as well if not bet- ter than any person in the State of Washington. He has done a tre- mendous job with the school district under some ver adverse cir- cumstances and has become a real expert, like Oscar Rose, on Public Law 874 because it. is almost his bread and butter. It is a pleasure for me as a Member of Congress to have, been asso- ciated with Mr. Hageness on this committee before. concerning this PAGENO="0574" 1396 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS tl)e of legislation, and I am sure that his testimony will bear great weight with us because he. speaks with the. voice of considerable experience. Mr. 1-TAGENESS. Thank you, Congressman Meeds for those kind words. I am honored, too, to be classed with Mr. Rose here in my knowledge of this subject. - I am T. OIai Hagene.ss, superintendent of Clover Park School Dis- trict. No. 400, Pierce County, Wash. It. is a pri~ilege to appear before your committee to test.ify in be- half of Public Law 89-10. The several provisions of that law are doing much to upgrade education and to alleviate educational cle- ficie.ncies of many under~)rivileged youth. Clover Park School Dis- trict. is participating in the. program to the extent eligible. In 1965- 66 the district receiVe(l 8121.861 under titles I and IT, and in the cur- rent. year, 196(3-67, anticipates about $105,433. \aluable as these grants are in enriching the districts educational ~)rogram. much more vital to the districts basic operation is Public Law 874. providing operational assistance to federally impacted (list ricts. Clover Park Schoot 1)istrict, located in a prime Federal impact area has received such Federal impact. funds for 25 years. WTithin or adjacent to the district are Fort Lewis, McChord Air Force Base, U.S. Veterans Hospital at. American Lake, Madigan General Hospital, and the F.S. Penitentiary on McNeil Island. In addition, there a.re other Federal activities farther removed but. employing residents of the district. School enrollment is 14,500 in grades kindergarten through 12, of which 8.932 (62 percent) are federally connected-3,961 living on Federal property and 4,971 living off Federal property with parents employed on Federal property. Enrollment is growing rapidly, up from 3,10() in 1950. Present growth is about a classroom per -week. The district, is primarily a suburban, residential area with little industry. About one-half of the district lies w-ithin Fort Lewis and Mc.Chord Air Base and is not. taxal)le. As a result, the school dis- trict's p~ pupil valuation for tax p~irposes is less than half the state- wide average for first-class districts. Therefore, in spite of consistent support from the districts voters-they have never voted down a school tax-there. is no way the district can maintain a comparable program with its neighbors without additional help. That the dis- trict enjoys a good reputation for basic academic excellence is in large I)aIt due to Federal assistance received over the years beginning in 1941 and continuing since then. The district's 1966-67 entitlement is $1,510,486 under Public Law 874 and $1,933,500 under Public Law 815. Chart I shows enrollment growth from 1950 to the present and estimated to 1970 and the co1Tes~)olldiflg degree of Federal impact. (The chart. follows:) PAGENO="0575" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1397 Chart I sh~s enrollment growth from 1950 to the prescnt and estimated to 1970 and the corresponding degree of Federal impact. CHART I CLG~'ER PARK ENROLLMENT SHGIING FEDERAL IMPACT ~1 -~ 5758 59 6061 6263 64656 6676 869'70 18.000 - - -~ 17.000 - = = ,L~ 16,000 - I 15,000 ` 14.000 13,000 1= == =1 : :~ E1 ~. ---- -- - --- - - 12,000 11,000 ::==== = =1 1= - - =: -- - 10.000 -- -- -- -- - PAGENO="0576" 1398 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS The financial burden such enrollment growth places on a district is easy to understand. Not so easily understood except by those immedi- ately involved in administering federally impacted districts are the special problems impact enrollments pose. The extent of these prob- lems generally varies ~ proportion to the degree of impact. enroll- inents, particularly of military enrollments. In looking at Clover Parks situation, we will consider the operating (Public Law 874) and capital outlay (Public Law 815) programs separately. PUBLIC LA\V 874-OPERATING To repeat, certain characteristics typify a heavy Federal impact district. Out. of an average 1966-67 enrollment of 14,500, Clover Park will have a turnover of ~5 to 30 percent. This means that about 8,700 students will be with us for less than the full school term, about 4,350 moving out and 4,350 moving in during the year. WThat this implies in program dislocations needs no amplification here. The school must continually adjust and readjust courses, class- rooms, teachers, and materials to the needs of those coming and those going. That this turnover is in direct ratio to a district's proximity to a Federal activity is indicated by a survey in 1965 of school districts at. varying distances from the impact center. (The chart. follows:) Chart Il-Pupil turn ui-cs ti-S s-elated to pro.riniity to Federal impact area Turnover- Excess of enrollment District Distance from impact over average area number belonging (percent) A 30 miles 6.9 B 8 miles 9.6 C Borders Clover Park.. 11.0 Clover Park Impact center 125.2 1 5-year average. "Depressed area" is a term commonly associated with teeming metropolitan tenants. or with Appalachia. It is not the usual nomen- clature of suburbia. Vet "impact" suburbia can be a "depressed area," educationally speaking. The culprit is not poverty but transience, and in (lover Park~s case, linguistics (non-English-speaking enrollees.) The Iowa tests of basic skills administered to Clover Park pupils in the fall of 1965 showed mean performance of sixth-grade classes in the district's highest elementary school at the 92d percentile com- pared with the national mean of 50. However, ill the lowest school the sixth graders were achieving only at the 38th percentile. This 300-percent range from low to high means very expensive adjustments in the elementary grades, staffwise. It means even more difficult and expensive program adjustments in the junior high schools PAGENO="0577" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1399 which these students enter and in which the school must offer programs. (The chart follows:) CHART III RANGE OF STUDENT MEAN PERFORMANCE OF SIXTH GRADE CLASSES IOWA TESTS OF BASIC SKILLS - CLOVER PARK SCHOOLS - Highest School 92% Lowest School 38%, National Mean 50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Mr. HAGENESS. Lower per pupil valuation, characteristic of the Federal impact district, is a big handicap in today's special levy econ- omy when schools depend so heavily on local propert.y taxes. Wash- ington State vQluations for 1965 in first-class districts (districts in excess of 10,000 population) range from a low of $2,530 (a heavy impact district) per pupil to a high of $11,220. The State average for such districts is $6,119. Clover Park's is only $3,426. Chart IV shows graphically what this means in comparative ability to finance education through local effort. (The chart follows:) CHART IV CLOVER PARK PER PUPIL VAL UATION COMPARED WASHINGTON STATE WITH OTHER FIRST-CLASS DISTR~~ State Low-$25301 Clover Park $3L~2ç~ $61l~ su, 220 State Average State High 0 $2000 $~OOO $6000 $8000 $10,000 ~12,0OO ] The four lowest valuatioii districts (first class) are all Public Law 874 recipients, three of them heavily impacted. The chief reason for their low valuations is the large proportion of tax-exempt property they embrace. Clover park must compete for staff with a district near the top in per pupil valuation. In order to support a comparable program, it. would be necessary for (lover Park to vote 31/4 times the millage levied in the other district. The is an impossible situation. Impact funds enable Clover Park to maintain a comparable program on tax rates comparable with those of other first-class districts. Public~ Law 874 is the only source of Federal funds that keeps impacted districts on a par with the others in the State. 7~-492 O-6T-pt. 2-----37 PAGENO="0578" 1400 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDIJCATION AMENDME~PS This program of support is so well established, so well administered, and allows such flexibility to local boards in meeting local needs, that we respectively ask the Congress to consider giving Public Law 874 a bit more permanence than it. now enjoys. WTe say this not, out of ingratitude but because of the continual uneasiness besetting dis- tricts such as ours that this is for 1 year only and next year something could go wrong. Though the number of districts eligible for impact aid is not as great as those eligible under other portions of Public Law 89-10, impact districts have particular problems that. can be met only by the basic. support. provided by these impact. funds. The capital outlay companion law to Public Law 874 is Public Law 815. As with Public Law 874, it has been a real boon to Clover Park District.. Clover Park presently operates five elementary schools on Federal property, three on Fort Lewis and two on McChord Air Force Base constructed under section 10 of Public La.w 815. Pres- ently the district has applications pending with the U.S. Office of Education in the amount of $1,933,500 for two more projects on Fort Lewis and for an additional building off post. It is our understanding that funds are sufficient to pay ouily 21 percent of applications now filed with the U.S. Office of Education. At. this time we do not know Clover Park's priority but, should t.he funds be. prorated, it would mean that, of the $1,933,500 we would receive only 8406,035. Meanwhile, the district has 609 elementary (kindergarten through grade 6) ~ category students unhoused on military reservations. By June 30, 1969, the target date for facili- ties pending in present applications, the total number for which classrooms are needed will be 1,440. Under Washington State's support. formula, Clover Park District buys the site and received about Si in State money for every $1 which the distric.t. invests in buildings and equipment. However, Clover Park's low valuation (explained earlier) makes it impossible for the district to raise enough local tax funds for matching purposes to build needed classrooms even with this State help. It is extremely urgent, therefore. that Public. Law 815 entitlements be available to take up the slack particularly so when 62 percent of the students have Federal connection. The board and administration o.f Clover Park School District appreciate the concern Congress has shown toward Federal impact districts over the years and appreciate, too, the very excellent man- ner in which Public Laws 874 and 815 funds have been administered by the governmental agencies concerned. Certainly there has been a mimmum of "redtape" and hoards have been able to apply the funds to existing emergencies. Clover Park School I)istrict is not relying on Federal funds with- out. effort of its own. This year the total tax levy for school purposes is 46 mils. Only 14 mils of that amount. is the basic. school tax. The 3~ additional mils were voted! on themselves by the residents of t.he district. As explained before, the fine local effort is not enough in view of this distric.t~s particular problems. That is where the impact aidi fits in. PAGENO="0579" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1401 We respectfully urge that. both Public Laws 874 and 815 be ex- tended for several years in order that the school district may experi- ence continuing stability in its general operations and building pro- gram. We hope, too, that funds may be ava1lable soon to start badly needed facilities eligible for reimbursement under Public Law 815. A matter of concerii to Clover Park is the nee.d to extend Public Law- 815 at. it. applies to the "B" category pupil, living off military property with a parent employed ~n a military property. Of Clover Park~s 893~ federally connected out of a total enroll- ment of 14,500. 3961 are "A" category and 4971 are "B" category enrollees. While "A" category legislatioii is permanent, the "B" category provision expires June 30, 1967. "B" students, whose parents work in tax-exempt facilities do con- tribute an extra cost. load on the school district. Though the home in which the student lives may contribute taxes, probabilities are particularly if there are several brothers and sisters of school age, that the house cannot. provide sufficient taxes to make up for the school costs incurred from enrollment of the several children. Adequate local school tax revenues depend on i)I'ivately owned, nonresidential property, industrial, retail, or other, not housing children. I thank you very much, Mr. Ford and other members of the corn- inittee, for this opportunity to testify. Mr. ROSE. Mr. Ford, I would like to defer to you to present the gentleman from your great State of Michigan. I might say that Dr. Simmons once was not in the. position he is now- in as deputy superintendent of one. of the largest school systems iii the United States but he was in school systems similar to ours and it has been very fine that. lie could have the tie-in with the other types of schools that now Mr. Simmons can give and we are very happy to have him with this group here. Mr. FORD. I am very happy to welcome I)r. Simmons here aiid add when he was in the small but honest school districts, it was in my congressional district. Now- that he has gone to the big city lie has displayed a continuing interest in the neighboring small schools. I might. say that in my area it~ is not always popular to be cooperat- ing with the big city of I)etroit but. in relation to schools, our coopera- tion has been excellent. This is largely because l)r. Simmons has taken to the 1)etroit~ school svsteni an understanding of the smaller schools and suburban and rural areas surrounding a big city. We have a dialog established as a result of his effort.s that. leads us to support. common causes. Sometimes I wonder how common they are whieii we get ~12 million for \Vavne (~ountv and his school district gets $11 million, and the other school district gets what is left over, but we are very happy to have J)r. Simmons back here. He was with Dr. Drexier, our new- superintendent, a few weeks ago and did not get the chance to testify. Your statement is now being placed in the record by the unanimous consent. of the members of the committee. I wonder if you would sum- marize it. for us as quickly as possible. because we. want to adjourn in about 10 minutes. (Dr. Simmons' statement follows:) PAGENO="0580" 1402 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM SIMMoNS, DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT, DETROIT P~nLIc SCHOOLS Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: I am William Simmons, Deputy Superintendent of Schools in Detroit, Michigan. I also serve as the staff chairman of the fifteen largest school districts in the nation. I appreciate very much this opportunity to join with my long-time colleagues from the Impacted Areas Districts to discuss the amendment and extension of Public Laws 815 and 874. While my viewpoint today will reflect the position of the largest cities receiving financial assistance under the impacted area legislation, my former involvement in the program, when superintendent of schools in a rural suburban school district, makes it possible for me to understand and support the unique problems of my fellow panelists. Since the Great Cities Superintendents have discussed in full the amendments to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, I will make specific reference to HR. 5471, H.R. 6118, and HR. 6558. The school districts of the Great Cities are now active participants in the impacted area assistance programs. Prior to the adoption of the new uniform eligibility requirements by the 89th Congress for P.L. 874, only three of these districts received assistance: Philadelphia, San Francisco, and San Diego. This year all the large school districts and many in between will be eligible for assist- ance under P.L. 874. The major problem in this regard is the lack of an appro- l)riation to fund the most recent amendments to the law-. San Diego has received construction aid and is a current applicant under the most recent filing date. Each year since 1950 I have followed with great interest the extension and exansion of these two laws by the Congress through the efforts of this Com- mittee. On several occasions I have had the pleasure of appearing before this (`onunittee to discuss such proposals. A review- of a few- notes from the histori- cal record relating to these two law-s seems pertinent at this time because of the similarity of the questions that seem to reappear w-ith each annual congressional appraisal of the two law-s in both the authorization and appropriation process. A summary of the arguments. Iro and con, summarized from the records of the 1953 and 1956 debates include the following points: The arguments against the legislation were directed toward: (1) the need for a balanced federal budget. (2) the increased w-ealth of local communities, (3) the inl1erent autonomy of local communities. (4) the varied degrees of federal responsibility. 5) the real benefits of widespread federal activities, 6) the inconsistent features of federal support programs, (7) the liberal admin- istration of grant-in-aid programs. 8 the emergency nature of Public Law 815 and Public Law- 874. 9) the unrealistic requirements of the program, (10) the support of segregated school systems. (11) the w-elfare state philosophy of all federal programs, and 12) the limited relief offered under any federal program. Argunients supporting the program of federal assistance offered under Public Law- 815 and Public Law 874 include : (1) the vital role of education in national (lefense. ) 2) the nationwide scope of the Problem of impacted school districts, 3) the bipartisan support of defense programs, (4) the excellent administra- tion of the impact program. (5) the efficiency of the federal government as a tax collection agency. (6) the inadequacy of the local property tax. (7) the corn- plete absence of federal interference. (8) the need for good schools in defense areas, (9) the unfairness of federal property tax exemption. (10) the adequate eligibility requirements found in Public Law 815 and Public Law 874, (11) the lasting nature of federal impact programs. and (12) the unfairness of the unequal educational opportunities created by federal activities. ~ow. of course. there has been added a new, forceful dimension, the federal educational programs authorized under the Elementary and Secondary Educa- tion Act, the National Defense Education, the Economic Opportunity Act, the Vocational Education Act, and several other programs w-ith w-idespread applica- tion. These programs are making tremendous changes in the educational process, as the record of these hearings will sh*ow, and require appropriations far beyond the requirements of P.L. 813 and P.L. 874. While the enactment of these laws w-ould seem to indicate a broadening in the congressional viewpoint in regard to federal financial assistance programs, I am realistically a~vare that the debatable points mentioned will. once again, be part of the congressional PAGENO="0581" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1403 record during this session. Hopefully, the many educational gains made na- tionwide through the several programs will rally greater congressional sup- port with each annual reappraisal and tend to make the arguments of the past milestones that had to be passed in meeting the socio-economic needs of our constantly changing society. The points I would make here are (1) federal educational legislation, to in- clude these two laws, has been expanded and funded each year, the arguments notwithstanding, (2) the new programs enacted have not replaced the need for the continued extension and expansion of P.L. 813 and P.L. 874. and (3) had revenues been possible from local sources or from state grants, it must be as- sumed that the several federally supported programs would not have reached their present dimensions. hR. 5471 and H.R. 0118 propose a simple extension of P.L. 815. I concur with this extension because of the great need for school construction in the im- pacted school districts. The simple fact that application requirements for this year alone will total in excess of $100,000,000 supports this position. It would seem appropriate that this legislation be continued and financed as long as the eligibility requirements can be met by the participating school districts. Indeed, I w-ould suggest that this basic legislation could be a vehicle for an expanded school construction program that would provide classrooms wherever they are needed. The use of P.L. 874 as such a vehicle for the Elementary and Secondary Education Act provides adequate precedent. hI.R. 6538 would add a new category of eligible pupils to P.L. 874, pupils living in low cost housing. Such an amendment would provide general fund monies to both the large cities, the nearby suburbs, and, possibly, to those im- iacted districts whose housing has been sold or assigned to a muncipality. Prior to the introduction of this proposal. I had circulated a questionnaire to each of the Great Cities and to the suburban school districts in Wayne, Macomb, and Oakland Counties in Michigan to determine the number of pupils living in housing units built with federal funds. The rationale behind the survey was I 1) pupils living in federal housing projects were eligible pupils during the ieriod of federal ownership, (2) the pupils now in school were there as a direct result of the federal project, (3) the transfer of title to another unit of govern- ment did not lessen the cost to the local school district of educating the pupils living therein. (4) the payment-in-lieu-of-taxes does not meet the per pupil costs of theY .~hool district, (3) where private ownership occurred, the taxable value of the units w-as ~ low that costs were not met. (6) many of these units become centers for the educationally and economically deprived pupil. A summary of the questionnaire for twelve of the Great Cities is attached. The magnitude of the problem is reflected iii the number of pupils reported as living in such units, 2S4, 760. These pupils are, for the most part, living in areas designated as eligible for project allotments under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. The very small per pupil allocation from pay- ments in lieu of taxes in almost every city is so small that the allocations under Title I are, in effect, diluted, since the local contribution rate for the entire district is drastically reduced by including these pupils from units with such limited tax potential. Every dollar received by a district that could qualify pupils in such units for payments under P.L. 874 w-ould be providing a higher local base which still provides the greatest financial share of all programs. An additional summary of the effect of such legislation on certain metro- pohitan communities w-ill be sent to the Committee as soon as the tabulation is completed. The possibility of such aid to the suburban school districts would help substantially in providing educational programs that might very well fore- stall a repetition of the iroblems now being experienced in the center city. I w-ould be remiss if I did not speak of the need for a supplemental appropria- tion to meet the needs of the new educational legislation enacted by the Con- gress since July 1. 1960. Briefly summarized, in a(lditiOn to those amounts necessary to meet the appropriations requirements of the acts mentioned above. the new authorizations would require for (1) the new provisions of Public Law $74, approximately $31 million: (2) the Adult Education Program (Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act). approximately $40 million. (3) Education of the handicapped (new Title VI. ESEA), approximately $30 million: and (4) Public Law- $15, approximately $100 million. PAGENO="0582" 1404 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS The Detroit Public Schools will qualify for approximately $800,000 under the new amendments to P.L. 874, \vhich will not be forthcoming without a supple- mental appropriation. I \vould also point out that the level of funds included in the Administrations budget for PU. 874 for fiscal 1968 will mean proration for all impacted districts, since the new group of school districts qualifying under PD. 874 was not included in the 1968 estimates. In summary, I would make these points: (1) the historical arguments against the federal assistance programs now under review by this Committee have been skillfully submerged through bipartisan support, often formed within this Committee, that recognized and dealt with the ever-changing socio-economic needs of our dynamic society: (2) federal assistance programs which provide educational dollars cannot he withdrawn, nor even curtailed, because of the present revenue structure of state and local units, without directly affecting the welfare of the children involved; (3) federal responsibility or impact does not cease \vhen direct federal relationships with local units end ; (4) federal pro- grains to assist in the education of the economically and educationally deprived youngster must be buttressed wherever possible by state and local funds, these locking with federal funds; (3) Public Laws 813 and 874 must be continued and expanded to meet the needs of the impacted districts; (6) impact legislation call hi-' broadened to provide assistance in areas of density and sparsity; (7) regardless of the fine points of questions that can he raised in regard to basic rationals. all money expanded in these programs has provided a direct benefit to children, the future citizens of the United States ; and, finally, (8) it must he said that programs authorized must be fully funded. I have enjoyed appearing once again before this Committee. Finally, I must say that this Committee has caused many changes in the provision of education at the elementary and secondary level, and, without these changes, the chang- ing needs could well have left our vaunted public educational system a far less useful instrument of progress. PAGENO="0583" I'uhlic housing survey, 1[)65-66 Number of dwelling units 10, 280 6, 103 14, 543 32, 712 7, 478 8, 178 8, 609 140, 480 6, 736 3, 129 5, 526 5, 045 248, 909 Number of families living in units 10, 092 5, 961 14, 127 32, 405 7, 478 8, 179 8, 459 14(1, 079 6, 121 3, 129 5, 526 5, 045 llaltimnore fluffalo.. Itostomi Chicago Cleveland Detroit Los Angeles New York St. Louis.~ Sami Diego_ - - - - San Francisco - - - - Memphis TotaL - - Not reported. Number of pupils living in units 16, 380 5,076 16,832 59, 748 7, 949 7, 950 16, 614 132, 494 8, 638 5, 186 (2) 7, 893 Nuniber of units built as Federal projects 1,600 4, 259 10, 702 31, 194 0 8, 178 8, 609 60, 942 6, 736 3,12 1, 085 136, 434 Receive payment in lieu of taxes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes - Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Formula used iii computing payment in lieu of taxes 10 percent of shelter rent 110 percent of shelter rent on federally aided IFull rate on State-aided 110 percent of shelter rent on federally aided l$3 per month per unit on State aided 10 percent of shelter rent do. do 10 percent ofremitalincomne 10 percent of shelter remit on federally aided; rate on equalized valuation at time of contract on State aided; amount of taxes at time of contract on city aided. lopercentofshelterrenL... - I'ublic Law874 lOpercemitofnetrent - 2 Unknosvn. 246, 597 284, 760 l'aynment in lieu of taxes, rate per pupil $28. 90 61.51 70. 95 37.35 11. 61 163.52 10.34 13.43 57. 87 12. 70 2. 42 Local tax contribu- tion, rate Per 1)ul)il $645. 32 (I) 556. 32 406. 00 381.32 277. 35 343. 28 399. 22 304. 82 (I) 143.00 00 00 00 H 71) 00 C) 0 00 00 C) H C 00 00 H -~ - PAGENO="0584" 1406 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. SI3I~roxs. Thank you very much, Mr. Ford. I am delighted to be here with my colleagues. I will go directly to the point of the impact legislation rather than spending any time discussing the amendments of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, and I am sure these were conducted in great detail on last Wednesday when our great city school superintendent attended here and stayed with this committee until almost 6 o'clock in the evenrng. Mv interest in Public Laws 874 an 815 go back over the years when I was an impacted school district, in Congressman Ford's congres- sional district. More recently, through the action of this committee last year, your liberalizing amendments, now- all of our great cities- and when I speak of the great. cities' organization, I am speaking of those 17 school dist.ricts that have the largest. school populations in the country-I might say I a.m staff chairman of their Federal legis- lat.ive program, so I am in the business of collecting the statistics that relate to the effect. of your liberalizing amendments on those districts during the past 2 years. I would point out that this legislation, though, before I discuss any- thing specific., seems to me to have developed some real merit over the years as time has gone on. It has been my observation and it was one of the reasons why I worked considerably with the Congress in trying to see all of the school districts of this Nation qualify. I would say, Mr. Meeds, your question concerning general aid to education, I think Public Law 874 does indeed provide a real con- veyance for a wider application of the general fund moneys that flow from that. I would say also that. Public Law 815 could certainly be expanded to take care of many needs we had. Mr. MEEDS. If I may interrupt, I would sugge.st you press this strongly with Congressman Ford and the problem you have. Mr. SIM~Ioxs. I can assure you this will not be my last discussion with Mr. Ford concerning this particular matter. I think Public Law 815 provides an excellent possibility for providing construction funds that are badly needed in the metropolitan areas. I spea.k also of many of the suburbs also that. many of you gentlemen here serve. I want to say I am completely in agreement with the need for an extension of Public Law 815, of course. I w-ould say in that regard that. we cannot ignore this need for appropriations for this particular l)iece of legislation. Mr. Rose indicated that scaling down even the bearest requirements of his survey it would be difficult to fund those construction needs that have all of the elements of eligibility for less than $100 million. Even though there is only going to be one large city, that of San T)iego qualifying for funds, should the Congress see fit to make full appropriations, we certainly are in favor of this kind of money going to construct, needed school facilities for boys and girls. There is a proposal in by Representative Pucinski of this committee that I am particularly interested in. That is one that adds a new category of eligible pupils to Public Law 874 and these would be pupils living in low-cost housing. PAGENO="0585" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1407 I do think that w-e must make some observations concerning the pro- posal that we have before us, which is H.R. 6558. He has directed his legislation at low-cost housing under the Housing Act. of 1937 and I am in complete agreement w-ith this. However, I would say just prior to the introduction of his bill, I did a survey of the Federal housing in the large cities of this Nation for which funds had never been received under Public Law 874 with the exception of the three cities that have qualified at different, times. Large numbers of housing construction projects start as Federal pro- jects but are later turned over to the municipalities. This housing remains, no tax base, the boys and girls are there, and the Federal Government withdraws. I think that the proposal that this be reinstated-and, by the way, this would not only apply to large city districts. Take, for example, in Mr. Ford's district, where there are a number of school districts which are underway. With Mr. Ford's permission, I will send him a complete report on the number of hous- ing units that still remain and create problems in those school districts. Mr. O'Hara's dist.rict. has a number of the same problems and, indeed, many of these gentlemen here at the table still face some housing that has been vacated by the Federal Government, and it. is partly the rea- son that they are faced with this business of low ~er-pupiI valuation because the Federal Government did indeed bring these facilities there; the kids are there, with no tax base and, as a result, that. is why they are forced to report this tyl)e of low valuation. I would call to your attention the. public, housing survey that. is at- tached to my testimony. There is the report on 12 of our cities. It seems to me that. it. is something that deserves some consideration when we take a look at the number of units built as Federal projects- 130,434. These are units for which, in most instances, with the excep- tion of San Diego, any funds were ever flowing from Public Law 874. This would be translated at. the rate of 1.43 pul)ils if you analyze the other columns there, and it would show you the tremendous number of boys and girls who are. living in these metropolitan areas that are not receiving any kind of assistance except that under the title 1 of the Elementary and Secondary Act. I would say that the funds are directed into those communities where the housing projects are; namely, because the. housing projects have become this kind of center where the low-income, family is found. In reality, without some way to buttress the tax base. that we do not have for those people in the houses, we are actually diluting the amount. of money we are receiving under the bill for special project areas. I believe you indicated a 10-minute time limit, Mr. Ford. I will close at this particular time and be ready to answer any questions when you get to that stage later today. Mr. Fom. Thank you. Before leaving, the chairman askedi me to recess the meeting until this afternoon, so we w-ill continue with this paiiel when we. reconvene, with the next panel immediately behind them. I see Mr. Lillywhite here and although we do not have your name on the schedule, Mr. Lillywhite, we had testimony from the Commis- sioner of Education t.he other day that he has some prospective amend- PAGENO="0586" 1408 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS rnent.s to 815 that will be preseiitecl. and I wonder if you could possibly return this afternoon. Mr. LILLYWHITE. Xes, sir. Mr. FORD. Would you be prepared to discuss those briefly while we have, this panel of impacted aid people available because it might. be more productive to have it at. this point in the record than separated by several days of testimony at some later date or some later point in the record. With that, we will recess until 2 &clock this afternoon. (Whereupon, at 12 :30, the. committee recessed to reconvene at 2 of the same day.) AFTER REcESS (The committee reconvened at. 2 p.m., Hon. Carl D. Perkins, chair- man of the committee, presiding.) Chairman PERKINS. Identify yourself for the record, please. STATEMENT OF JOHN W. EATER, SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, RANTOUL, ILL. Mr. EATER. Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the corn- init.tee, my name is J. W. Eater, superintendent of Rantoul city schools, Rantoul. Ill. I wish to thank you for this opportunity to present certain facts and my views on H.R. 6230 and the extension of Public Law 81-874 and Public. Law 81-815. Having served as superintendent of the Rantoul city schools for 22 years, I have been fully aware of the financial burden encountered by the Rantoul public schools due to Federal impact even before the enactment of Public Laws 81-874 and 81-815 in 1950. Since Public. Law 89-10 t.he Elementary and Secondary Ediièation Act of 1965 has been in effect in Illinois for the school year 1965-66 and a portion of 1966-67 it has given me an opportunity to study the opportunities offered to the educationally disadvantaged children in our State. In general I endorse the philosophy of the act and believe that. considerable gain has been made and will continue to be made to provide some of the necessary opportunities for these children. However, my study of the Federal impact program and the title I and title II programs clearly indicate that we must not confuse our thinking relative to the needs as we find them under Public Law 81-874 and titles I and II of the ESEA. The conditions of impact w-hich cause need for financial assistance to local dist.ricts in federally affected areas are not contingent on low income factors since the families of the students who impact the schools are employed on or assigned to military installations. If low income factors exist, they would follow iatlier than create the impact. We. seem to be dealing with two conditions (1) pockets of impact, and (2) pockets of poverty and in my opinion they are two completely diverse situations. In order to clearly show the. substantial and continuing impact. in the Rantoul city schools on an enrollment basis rather than an ADA basis, I would like to submit table I w-hich will spread the total en- rollment by categories. (The table referred to follows:) PAGENO="0587" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1409 TABLE l.-Pci-ccntagc of Fcdcral impact, current school yea,-, 1965-66 Total enrollment 3(a) Percent of 3(h) Percent of Non-Federal Percent of total total total 4,646 2,144 47 1,772 38 730 15 To show the Federal impact which Chanute. Air Force Base has placed on Rantoul city schools since 1950, I would like to submit table II. (The table referred to follows:) TABLE IL-Federal impact in Rantoui city schools (elementary only) Mr. E.sri-:r. The above triet. and the relationship ADA. I)uring 1949-50 was 56.68 pel'cellt of the school year, it. is 84.~8 percent. As you scan the growth pattern of tile tallies, von will note a steady increase in both total ADA and federally connected ADA each year. Table III below will give tile growth comparisons by percentage of increase since 1949-50. (The table referred to follows:) TABLE III.-Gi'owt/i comparison-Rantoul city scli ools-19-year period ADA federally connected ADA nonfeder- ally connected Total ADA~ Year Federally Total ADA connected students Percent of Non-Federal total, ADA students 1949-50 1950-51 1951-52 1952-53 1953-54 1054-55 1955-56 1956-57 1957-58 1958-59 1959-60 1960-61 1961-62 1962-63 1963-64 1964-65 1965-66 1966-67 1967-68 (estiniate) 693. 17 1,058.47 1, 131.00 1, 325. 74 1,565.62 1,690.77 1,827.64 2,087. 12 2, 078. 89 2,247.38 2,481. 51 2, 934. 95 3,102.64 3,127.27 3, 298.22 3,732.89 3,861.56 4, 183.28 4, 603.00 392.93 785.07 017.00 1,097.38 1,287.43 1,392.82 1,500.68 1,707.83 1, 679. 62 1,836. 28 2, 029.60 2,427.80 2, 537.28 2,574.77 2,711.31 3,080.00 3, 185. 15 3, 526. 00 3,958.00 56.68 74.25 81.07 82.77 82. 23 82.37 82. 11 81.82 80.79 81.70 81.78 82.72 81.77 82. 33 82. 20 82. 50 82.48 84. 28 86. 00 Percent of total, ADA 43.32 25.75 18.93 17.23 17. 77 17.63 l789 18. 18 19. 21 18. 30 18.22 17.28 18.23 17.67 17.80 17.50 17. 52 15.72 14. 00 300.24 272. 50 214. 00 228.36 278. 19 297.75 324.04 379. 29 399. 27 411. 10 451.90 507. 15 565. 36 562. 50 586. 10 652.89 676.41 657.28 645.00 tables cleai-lv show the increases in our dis- of fedei-ally connected students to the total the percent of federally connected students total ADA. whei-eas in 1966-67 tile current Gain iii 1949-50 1966-67 ADA Percent of since gain 1949-50 392. 93 3,526. 00 3, 133. 07 797. 36 300.24 657.28 357.04 118.91 693. 17 4, 183.28 3,490. 11 503. 49 Projected Gain in ADA ADA 1967-68 since 1949-50 3, 958 3, 565. 07 645 344.76 4, 603 3, 909. 83 Percent of gain 907. 30 114.82 564. 05 Mr. E.~rEri. The 1967-68 flgiii-es OH the above tables are calculations based on current developments in `the Rantoul Chanute community. PAGENO="0588" 1410 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS I could project enrollment figures considering the programed ac- tivities in this community to include the school year 1968-69 and 1969- 70. But I believe that by careful consideration of these prior com- parisons I have shown that the impact of federally connected students has been, is, and will continue to be extremely heavy. Therefore. I feel it would be needless to belabor these growth com- parisons further. These steady, but substantial, increases in ADA of both the total and the Federal impact have been due to Chanute Air Force Base, which is now known to be the third largest airbase in the United States, and which is currently increasing its technical student load and capacity. These increases are placing great demands on the Rantoul Cit.y schools, District No. 137 to provide additional school facilities and educational opportunities for Chanute Air Force Base dependents. Chanute Air Force Base is a technical training center offering ap- proximately ~00 courses in aircraft maintenance and control, as well as technical training for the missile weapons and the firefighting school. We must realize the apparent effect such activities would have on (lie demand for homes within the boundaries of District No. 137. Some knowing conditions in Rantoul, have rented or purchased trailers and parke(l them in numerous instances, in temporary loca- tions waiting their turn to put their trailer in one of the many trailer parks either in Rantoul or oii the base. Many families upon being assigned to Chianute Air Force Base finds there are no quarters available when they arrive. In the majority of cases they are provid1ed with temporary housing facilities either on the base or in the community. In many instances they are forced to find residence in a neighboring town and commute to the airbase. According to the authoritIes on Chanute Air Force Base there are more than 1,300 employees currently commuting to and from the base. These employees are seeking housing in the Rantoul area since they are subject to call on a ~4-hour basis or would prefer to live closer to their employment. Very little, if any. tax revenue for schools is paid by the occupants and owners of trailers in the various trailer camps located within the (listrict since personal property tax is either ~aicl in their home State or the owners usually move before the tax payments are due. Although the population of the village of Rantoul has increased from ~,400 in 1940 to over ~7,500 in 1966, the assessed valuation has only increased from S4,031.350 in 1940 to $33,715,682 in 1966. From these. facts it is readily seen that the J)opulation has increased 1,045 percent in the 26-year period. All this increase in 1)opulation is (lireethy or indirectly attributable to the Federal activities of Chanute Air Force Base since there are no factories or other industries other than stores, service stations, garages, etc. withimi the boundaries of the district, or in adjacent communities. Most of the working population therefore are employed on a tax- free Federal installation. The estimated taxable value of Chanute Air Force Base is ~50(),000,000. Then if the place of employment of ~ per~e~~ of our school populatiomi plus the valuation of the re- niainder of time District No. 137 were taxable at the present current PAGENO="0589" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1411 operating rate, no difficulty would be experienced in financing either construction of bulidings or the ol)eration and maintenance of our schools. (The table referred to follows:) Comparison of growth pcrcentagcs in Rantoul 1939 1966 Percent increase Population Assessedvaluation 2,400 4,031,350 27,500 33,715,682 1,045 736 Student population 271 5,146 1799 Mr. EATER. When Congress enacted Public Law 81-874 and Public Law 81-815 in 1950, it was prompted by the need to provide funds so that children of the members of the great American defense team could have a decent educational program. This program should at least be comparable in quality and quantity to that pro~icled other children in the area or political subdivision where they might be corn- pelled by the U.S. Government to reside. The funds under Public Law 81-874 and Public Law 81-815 have done this for this past 17 years with a remarkable degree of equity. Payments to the Rantoul city schools, as provided by applications under Public Law 81-874 as amended, have constituted on an average 45 percent of the total operating expenditures during the past 17 years. Without these. payments it~ would have been impossible for the local district to provide educational opportunities to the dependents of pci'- sonnel employed on Chanute Air Force Base. I realize it would be pi'~1ctically impossible to eAact legislation which would solve all the financial piobleins in all the. federally impacted clis- tricts in all the States of the United States wit ii the iiianv patterns of State finance, State school laws and the other variables of one kind or another. 1-however, I ant sure all of you have beeii proud of those 1)ieces of legislation knowii as Public Law 81-874 and Public Law 81-815 which have been applicable for 17 years and has provided educational 01)- portumties and school facilities to millions of stu(lents. I am sure, too, that you are aware that no serious justifiable criti- cisins have been made in connection with Public Law 81-874 and Pub- lic Law 81-815 or the administration of tile acts by the Commissioner of Education. The facts just presented to you relate to the Federal impact on the Rantoul city schools. Although the Federal impact in 175 other dis- tricts in Illinois varies somewhat, I believe the information I have just given on my own district shows the characteristics of Federal impact in Illinois. Next I would like to present some extracts of a report to tile Ninth School Problems Commission, February 20, 1967, by Noah S. Neace, director of title I, Public Law 89-10, for Illinois, on poverty impact. This report attempts to summarize the efforts of the Office of Superintendent of Public Instructions in providing genuine assistance to culturally disadvan- taged youth within the framework of the intent of Title I, Public Law 89-10- Iii Illinois the Title I staff approved a total of 952 projects from 866 school dis- PAGENO="0590" 1412 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS tricts for the school year 1963-GO. Over 300.000 students particiPated in these compensatory education programs. The administrative costs. at the state level, were $404,846.92. This cost repre- sents less than one percent of the funds allotted for Title I. Public Law 89-10-- according to the budgeted funds for the school year 1966-67 we feel that better utilization of the funds will be made for the education of the disadvantaged children. T.ndoubtedly the most serious deterrent iii the development of effective and efficient programs for the utilization of Title I funds was the acute shortage of l)ersonnel: administrative, general teaching, and specialists. With the severe curtailment of funds at the federal level, it appears that very little can be done to help the local educational agencies iii their efforts to retrain teachers and specialized personnel. The impact of the Title I program on students is yet to be measured, the long range index probably being best disceriied through an increasing index of con- tinuing education and a reduction in dropout rate. It is evident from local educational agency reports, verbal reports, and inter- views. that the educational programs developed in behalf of disadvantaged hildreii have proved to many of them and their parents. that the school is an agency which genuinely cares about theni. The advent of Title I has given to teachers, parents, and children a new hope and way of expressing hope through educational action. Should Title I funds be curtailed or restricted, these teachers, parents and children will fall victims to an overwhelming sense of frustration. It would have been better that they had never gained this hope than it shoul(l 1)0 wrested from them. We in Illinois must not only carry forward with the federal funds provided. we must provide the necessary funds to hell) retrain the teachers and specialists I lint are needed by the educationally disadvantaged. To further substantiate the difference between the impact pocket and the poverty pocket I have 1)repared a table showing the funds received by 1 of the most heavily federally impacted districts in Illinois and showing the amount of entitlements in 1965-66 under Public Law 81- 874 and the corresponding entitlements under title I and title TI of ESEA. (The table referred to follows :) TABLE IV.-Tu'clt'c hcas'icst fcdcrally iinpactcd districts in Illinois School district Title I Title II Public Law 81-874 Belleville Township high School $55,794.90 $10,062.30 $107,843 Glenview CC. District No.34 19,799.22 12,573.00 135,618 highland Park. high School District No. 113 14,878.64 7,104.60 109, 047 l{ighwood-Highland School District No. 11 10,361.91 3,889. 40 144,396 3lascoutah C.C. District No.10 18(66.92 4,788.80 446,596 North Chicago District No.04 20,989.51 5,960.20 776,241 North Chicago High School District No. 123 14,878.64 2,046.60 234,906 Northfield Township High School District No. 225 11,283.85 5,666.40 68,637 Rantoul City Schools. District No. 137. 15,410.02 7,462.40 864,629 Rantoul Township High School District No. 193 11,690.36 1,995.20 266,911 \Vaukegan School District No.61 91,928.74 21,339.00 170,765 \Vaukegan Township high School Dislriel No. 119 36, 66.~ 22 6,776.20 135,698 Total 321,747.93 89,574.10 3,461,287 Mr. EATER. By comparing the amounts of funds received by these 1:2 districts under title I. title II and Public. Law 81-874 it is obvious that the funds i'eceived under Public Law 81-874 greatly exceed the funds from the other two. This alone would indicate that. title I and tit.le~ II could never replace Public Law 81-874 funds but. that is not the entire story. The purposes of these funds are entirely different. Title I funds are provided to establish a cidit iona 1 programs for the educationally PAGENO="0591" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1413 disadvantaged students in the community, or in other words, programs that were not being offered by the school district. Therefore, none of these funds can be used for the general operatmg expenditures. Title II funds are provided only for the upgrading of library re- source materials in all districts in all the States. These funds are allocated on a per pupil basis varying from $1.40 to $1.90 per student enrolled in both the public and nonpublic schools. None of the funds under this title can be used for salaries. The philosophy of the Federal impact legislation or Public Law 81-874 is basically that the U.S. Government is to provide its propor- tionate share of the local revenue, or in other words, this revenue is in a sense in lieu of tax payments. The moneys under this category. therefore~ may be used for the ~en- oral operating costs of the district in the same manner as those received from local taxation. As I mentioned before, it is evident that the funds are not provided for the same purposes and Congress should constantly keep this fact clearly in mind in all future legislation. Another Public Law that was enacted in 1950 along with Public Law 81-874 expires June 30, 1967. This is Public Law 81-815, as amended, w-hich provides for construction of minimum school facili- ties in federally impacted areas. Originally this legislation was de- signed to be of a temporary nature, however, the burden imposed on local communities has proven to be permanent. I am sure there will continue to be~ a progressive need for greater funds under this legisla- tion. It is a must that. this construction act be made permanent. The immediate problem facing the 90th Congress is to provide funds to finance the construction projects currently pending in these impacted areas across the `tJiiit~d States. Table V shows the 17 school districts in Illinois who have applied for constructions funds prior to the cutoff date of February 20, 1967. Unless funds are provided by a supplemental appropriation, very few, if any of these construction projects in Illinois can be approved. This is a serious situation and must have immediate consideration by the 90th Congress. (The document referred to follows:) TABLE V.-('onstruction. projects in Illinois filed. prior to cutoff (late of Feb. 20. 1967 Congres- Federal School District County sional Congressman funds District requested Maywood-Melrose Park 89 Cook 6 I). .T. Ronan $183,338 liighwood-Highland Park ill Lake 12 R. McClory 289,000 North Chicago High School 123 do 12 do 300,000 Zion Public School District 6 do 12 do 297,255 Wilmington CU 209 Will 14 J. N. Erlenborn... 500.000 Manhattan School District 114 do 14 do 17,250 Coal City C.C I dirundy 15 Mrs. C. Reid 107,200 Paxton Unit D 2 Ford L. C. Arendc 102,000 MantenoC.U 5 Kankakee... do 48,600 Gifford C.C 188 Champaign. 22 W. L. Springer.... 20,300 Penfield C.C 224 do 22.. do 22,400 Rantouliligh School 193 do 22 do 400,000 Thomasboro C.C 130 do 22 do 30,745 Mascoutah high School 1)istricL - 18 St. Clair.... 24 M. Price 50, 000 O'Fallon Township high School.. 203 do 24 do 60,000 O'Fallon C.C 90 do 24 do 200,000 Mascoutah C.C 10 do 24 do 978,320 3,606,408 Total PAGENO="0592" 1414 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS To summarize the facts presented, we must first of all recognize that Public Law 81-874 and Public. Law 81-815 are to assist in financing educational services and facilities for all pupils in federally impacted areas, and title I and title II of Public Law 89-10, ESEA, are to compensate for deficiencies within only a portion of the school's total pupils. Funds for the ESEA are for an entirely different purpose and cannot be substituted for impact funds. Next we are faced with the emergency situation of the supplemental appropriation under the present Public. Law 81-815. Many urgently needed classrooms cannot I)e constructed unless action is taken immediately. Although Federal assistance under Public Law 89-10 is essential to fill the gaps in the experience and skills of many children from (lisadvantageci backgrounds, the consensus of opinion of all school ad- ministrators in federally impacted school districts is that Public Law 81-874 and Public Law 81-815 should become permanent legislation since this is a continuing and progressive problem. \\rhy face this problem every ~ years or so, when action by the 90th Congress could alleviate such situations for the future? If this cannot. be accomplished during this session of Congress my recommendation would then be that the expiration of Public Law 81-874 and Public Law 81-815 coincide with the expiration date of Public Law 89-10, ESEA. It. has indeed been a pleasure to present my views on this very criti- cal situation which affects the Rantoul City schools as well as hundreds of school districts throughout the United States. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much for an excellent state- ment, Professor Eater. How many have not yet made a statement, Mr. Rose? Mr. ROSE. Mr. Hood does not have a statement but he will make some verbal comments. Chairman PERKINS. We are always glad to see you back. STATEMENT OF R. E. HOOD, SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, BRUNSWICK, GA. Mr. HOOD. I am Ralph E. Hood, retired superintendent, of schools of Brunswick, Ga.~ and a representative of a number of schools throughout the South working on this problem. Chairman PERKINS. How long were you the superintendent at. Brunswick, Mr. Hood? Mr. HooD. ~5 years and 14 days and I enjoyed coming up here most of those 25 years and we would never have survived if there had not been an "up here." I want to apologize to the committe. for not having copies of my testimony. Mv testimony is resting comfortably somewhere in an airport, I don't know which airport. yet. I will just hurry along and make a few statements and bring out. about two points which I think should be brought out. First I want to congratulate this committee and the Congress and the Nation upon the excellent law~ Elementary and Secondary School Act. It is a great. law. PAGENO="0593" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1415 Make no mistake about that. If it is financed properly it is going to make a remarkable impact not only on the health and happiness of the people of the United States but upon the economy. My very conservative figures, if this bill is continued in operation and ade- quately financed the 8 million children thereby involved will, in a few years when they get on to the working market, earn about $20 billion a year more than they would have if this bill had not come along. That $20 billion will give a considerable boon to the economy of the United States of America. It was a great law. I want to congratulate and thank Mr. Perkins' committee through the years for his unusual patience in letting the school people come in here and tell their story. No 1natter how many of the great and alleged and actual acclaimed experts come along, he has always listened and listened and listened and given the school superintendents of the tThited States a great deal of time to come here and discuss things, and we appreciate it. Last year was a very good example of the functions of democracy along those very lines. A group that I will refer to as noneducating educators recommended to the people of the United States and the Congress that they more or less chop up this impact aid substantially. Well, chop it in two, you might say, and Mr. Perkins heard the testimony of all of the people involved at great length night and day. He allowed us to bring forth the fact that that law would have caused millions of children to suffer, many of them with a curtailed school year, not even having a 9-month school. The Congress, therefore, listened and corrected the recommenda- tions of some of these noneducating educators and I am not reflecting on them for being that. It just shows in a democracy you have to have a governing body to ride herd on the experts. Mr. Churchill said democracy is the worst form of government in the world, un- fortunately there are no alternatives. I want to point out one thing that might turn out to be serious if things like this go on through the years. The Office of Education hired the Stanford Research In- stitute to go in and study this law and they came out with some strange doctrines. Research is research. They came out with this doctrine that they were expressing opinion in there., that the dollars in Public Law 874, not just these words, had not increased t.he amount. of learning in the United States as much as these other laws would or might. To my consternation I went to San Francisco to talk to these people. I got hold of the head man who directed the study and I asked him "Do you justify what you have done in here in expressing these opinions?" He said, "The Office of Education told us to express opinions." I said, "Dr. Spiegelman, didn't you just tell me you did not know anything about education?" He said, "Yes, I did. I don't know any- thing about it." I said, "lVouldn't it seem a little more plausible and feasible to give opinions they would hire somebody who knew something about education?" He said "that is right" and he made no bones about it. I said we could hire his outfit to come into Georgia to make a study of the amount of learning that the State was getting out of their money, and he said, "No, we are not equipped to do that." 7i-492~----GT----pt. 2-3S PAGENO="0594" 1416 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS First he was mad because I didn't bring Oscar Rose with me but he just admitted they were out of place he thought in expressing opinions about education. I spent a lot of time in my life studying research and that is an old problem. and old trick if you will allow me t.o say for a research outfit to do 100 or 1,000 pages of research and slip in a few opinions and the man assumes that is all research and they grab and run with it.. Another very serious thing some people at the Office of Education, a great many of them in fact. I have heard make a statement. that. this 89-10 would do the same thing as 874 and take the place of it. Now, gentlemen, that is a serious accusation. I mean it is serious and I don't. see how they can bring themselves around t.o that because their own rules in the Office of Education make it impossible t.o take the place of it. We spent ~30.000 in my school trying to get some 89-10 money and we got it and it is ~reat. and it. is grand, but a lot, of those that. sit. in the seats of the mighty have made that. statement all over the United States and nobody has ever given me any evidence after you tell them that. I was disappointed and I noticed that the Commissioner of Educa- tion did not. call attention to the fact that-did not mention 874 which was a. law which did great. things and resulted in great. things being done for an enormous number of children throughout this country. According to my very conservative arithmetic Public Law 874 ha.s actually made. it. posSil)le for 42 million children to get more education and better education than they would have down through the. years. It is a. great. law and it. was not even mentioned at. all. Had it not been for that. law, those 42 million children would have, received a watered down reduced education. some. more and some less. I al~o urge the full financing of 815 and 874. It. has already been t.ouc.hed on by the other gentlemen. I appreciate the opportunity to come 1)ack, Mr. Perkins. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much, Mr. Hood. You have made a good statement just as you have always done in the past. Our next w~tness is Mr. Rose. Mr. ROSE. Mr. Richard Taylor from Widefield District, of Colorado. STATEMENT OF RICHARD TAYLOR., SUPERINTE1~ThENT, WIDEFIELD SCHOOL. COLORADO SPRINGS, COLO. Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am Richard Taylor, superintendent of Widefield-Securit.y Schools, sub- urban Colorado Springs, Cob. By way of some of the history of the school district which I believe in the past I presented to Mr. Perkins and this committee I would like to say the Security School District was 12 years ago a one room coun- try school with 24 students. Last week it passed 6.200 student.s and is growing a.t the rate of 40 some per week. With about 60 percent of the students being federally connected, so we owe the existence of our educational programs to Public Law 874 and 815. PAGENO="0595" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1417 To avoid repetition, I would prefer not to read my testimony as many of the things covered in it have been covered by the people who preceded me and perhaps I could refer to about five points. No. 1 is where I relate to the various shortages of qualified teachers of mathematics and science. As it is necessary in the national interest to provide a Teacher Corps to work in areas of the underprivileged, it is also necessary to insure the adequate instruction of the future leaders of industry and science. The competition from industry for trained teachers must be met if schools are to continue to meet this challenge. I believe that funds that would allow school district.s to pay for a full year's employment of teachers in critical subject areas such as mathematics, physics, and chemistry would provide an incentive for college students to enter the teaching profe.ssion. Item No. 2, I believe it should be clearly stated that. ESEA programs do not replace impacted area needs and certainly we have, heard this mentioned before. In fact., if funds are decrease.d to schools which are so dependent on 874 the funds as the district I represent. it would. mean a decrease in the expenditure per pupil and thereby eliminate us from the eligibilit.y of title I, title II of ESEA and as I read the interpretation of the act. A heavy impacted district such as the Security Schools then would become completely ineligible because we. would not have the sources to raise the money and continue the per pupil costs thereby again we would be ineligible, for ESEA programs. The build up of Federal activities to meet the national emergency has created an ever increasing burden on other schools near military bases. Because of this I have suggested that a plan for payment. of the Federa.l Government obligation to aid in the. education of children in these areas be base.d on a formula that. will more. nearly reflect the true cost. of education and will allow for an adequate and acceptable educational program. I would propose as a just. method of determining support a base such as one similar to t.he one that all impacted districts now have and work under and this is determined by arl)itration with the U.S. Office of Education and that this base. be either increased or decreased yearly according to the average cost of education within a given State. Thereby, we who operate so entirely on impacted funds could keep our programs during recent periods of time the costs have increased yea.rTy, the Federal payments have not kept up with the costs, so we must find some manner to cap up our expenditures if we are~ going t.o keep even. I believe that the decrease in the quality of education being offered in heavy impacted districts is not being fair to the students of the military people particularly when their fathers are fighting to pre- serve equality and freedom in other places. Item No. 3 I should refe.r to is part B of title V of the amended act.. This does not, to my point of view, aid in the. strengthening of State departments of education. Instead it would create another agency to do those duties which a.re the function of good State. departments of educat.ion. PAGENO="0596" 1418 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDiJCATION AMENDMEWI'S I find it inconsistent in the action again as I read that title it was initially to strengthen State departments of education. Now we have an amendment that would seem to create another agency to perform those duties. If in the State of Colorado the Governor were giver the opportunity to appomt another agency, I believe it would be underminmg the State department of education and reducing the effectiveness that it has gained during the past year by operating under the previous title V. Item No. 4. I should like to present the idea that the present forms of categorical aid have been successful in meeting identified educa- tional needs. While some school administrators voice approval for general Federal aid, we also recognize that it would not permit the direct attack on the serious educational problems that we have had to face. I believe that the Federal Government, committees such as this meet- ing with working superintendents such as we are gathered here in the identification of the needs have an obligation to work to appropriate funds to then attack those needs as they exist in a specific manner and not. by working through a district, and saying here are increased gen- eral funds, do with them as you will. Many, many local boards of education would find it very impractical or practically impossible to attack some of the major problems t.hat we have been able to do by having categorical aid. My last item, No. 5, when the committee considers the extension of section five for the buildings for impacted districts, I would request that serious consideration be given to the term minimum facilities. I believe that this term and its interpretat.ion has kept the children in heavy impacted districts from having an educat.ion t.hat is compara- ble to those in nonimpacted districts. I was certainly very happy last. year to see t.hat esthetics and estheti- cal values should be a determining factor and looked at when these funds are allocated. If I could relate to a particular distnct in the Whitefie.ld school district, we have eligibility for about 650 students at the present time. We have over 000 st.udents at.tending part day or half day sessions. So we have the eligibility for the funds but since the funding has not been made, the children are suffering. They are being shortened in their educational opportunities because here is the eligibility and yet there are no dollars to carry it out. I should like to thank the committe again for listening to me, for the opportunity to present the.se and would certainly hope that you might later have some questioning further on some o~ my ideas. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much. Mr. ROSE. Mr. Chairman, our final person to testify is Mr. Hanks from the Ysleta School District, in El Paso, Texas. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Taylor's complete statement will be placed in the record at this point. (The document referred to follows:) TEsTI~roNY OF RICHARD D. TAYLOR. SrPERINTENDENT OF WIDEFmLD-SECURITY SCHOOLS Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: I am Richard Taylor, Super- intendeiLt of Widefield-SeCUrity Schools, suburban Colorado Springs. Colorado. I wish to express appreciation for the opportunity to respond to HR. 6230. I al'~o will discuss some of the needs of Feder~~Ily impacted school districts. PAGENO="0597" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTATION AMENDMENTS 1419 The National Teacher Corps should become a part of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act with advance funding to enhance the necessary plan- ning for continuing programs. This program to aid the impoverished schools is necessary in the attempt to equalize opportunities for all American youth. As a counter-part, I would suggest an extension of the National Defense Education Act to allow for the funding necessary for lengthening the employment of teachers in critical subject areas such as mathematics and science. The trained teachers in these fields are becoming more acute due to the inability of schools to compete with industry. By making a part of the teacher's salary eligible under Title 111, N.D.E.A., schools could offer employment on a twelve month basis at a salary that would enhance teaching to the more capable college graduate. The extra time would be well used in developing programs for both teacher in-service and student subjects. Part B, the new proposed addition to Title V, "Grants for Comprehensive Edu- cational Planning and Evaluation", appears to be inconsistent with the original law. Title V has done much to add needed strength to State Departments of Education. It provides funds to improve educational planning, identify edu- cational problems, evaluate programs, record and store data, engage in research, and other activities that provide for more effective State Education Departments. Education in general has been advanced because of the leadership made available by this worthwhile legislation. Now the amendment is proposed that will require the State to designate a "State Educational Planning Agency" which shall set forth a statewide program of systematic planning and evaluation, including such activities as goals and priorities, means of accomplishing educational objectives, planning new programs and improving existing ones, collecting and cataloging information. This planning agency would, therefore, be duplicating the functions of the State De- partments of Education and quite possibly create dissention among both. It is further provided that grant applications must be recommended by the State Governor. This is not in keeping with the desirable sound practice of many states to keep education separate from political functions. The State of Colorado is not alone, in that it does not consider knowledge or ability in educational matters as being a requisite for the office of Governor. The other provisions of H.R. 6230 are examples of the creativity and imagina- tion that have been so prevalent in recent educational legislation. They would certainly improve programs that are even now doing a tremendous job toward the elimination of ignorance and poverty from the American scene. The categorical aid that has been provided by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, has served a purpose that would not have been achieved by a general aid program. Each Title has identified a specific need and made the school public aware of problems that previously had been the concern of educators. This total approach to a Nation's problems must continue if we are to gain the support needed to correct the educational deficiencies. The ESEA programs do not replace the need for Impacted Area support. Both programs relate to different problems. The present urgent need of impact districts is for the funding of P.L. 815. In the Security School District there is an eligibility for funds to house six hundred students. Since the funds have not been made available, nearly nine hundred students are attending school in half-day sessions. The school district has 60% of its students from parents employed on Federal property. This high percentage places the district greatly dependent on P.L. 815 and 874 funds. Because of the failure of P.L. 874 funds to increase with the costs, the local property tax rate has increased 23% in the present year. The military build up to meet the National Emergency is creating an ever increasing burden on the local school districts with Federal installations in their locality. I sincerely urge that the provision to adopt "group rates" be replaced with a system that will more readily increase or decrease with the average cost of education in a given state. The threeway partnership that is referred to regarding the education of chil- dren of employees on Federal tax exempt property, should become one of equal sharing of financial responsibility. Then heavy impact school districts could become leaders part of the time rather than always being behind. I wish to thank the Committee for inviting me to appear and present these points of concern. Your accomplishments of the past have had a marked In- fluence on the education of this Nation, and I am sure the future efforts of this committee will be for continued improvement. PAGENO="0598" 1420 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. ROSE. Mr. Hanks is from El Paso but city limits and school districts do not coincide so he represents the Ysleta School District and he has been there for a great many years and I think he will give you something about the growth of those schools in that area since he came from there many years ago. STATEMENT OF J. M. HANKS, SUPERINTENDENT, YSLETA SCHOOL DISTRICT, EL PASO, TEX. Mr. BlANKS. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. I am J. M. Blanks, superintendent of schools, Yslet.a Independent School District, and have held tins position for a number of years during whic.h time it has been my privilege to file statements with this com- mittee regarding what has come. to be known as Federal impact legis- lation. It. is my understanding that this committee is considering amendments to the ESEA of 1965, under H.R. 6230, and the ESEA of 1967. This bill, introduced by the honorable chairman of the Committee on Education and Labor, amends the Elementary and Secondary Edu- cation Act of 1965 and again makes some changes in Public Law 874 and Public Law 815, as amended. In addressing my comments to the Elementary and Secondary Edu- cation Amendments of 1967, I do not care to raise any objections to these amendments. This act is a good approach to problems in cer- tahi areas, and the Ysleta Independent School District would qualify for aid under these sections of the present law, as amended. In a(ldressmg niv comments to the Elementary and Secondary Edu- cation Amendments of 1967, 1 do not care to raise any objections to these amendments. rihis act is a good approach to problems in cer- tain areas and the Ysleta Independent School District should qualify for aid under these sections of the present law as amended; but this aid certainly would not take the place of assistance presently secured under Public Law $75 and Public. Law 815, 81st Congress, as amended. It. is to the miscellaneous amendments t.o the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. and the federally impacted areas program that I shall address my remarks. You will note that. the temporary provision of Public Law 815, which affects students whose parents live off and work on Federal property expires ,June 30, 1967, and the same section of Public Law 874 expires June 30, 1968. These sections should he extended to expire June 30, 1972, the same date as the proposed amendments to Public Law 815 and Public Law 874 under H.R. 6230 to protect. school districts like the Ysleta In- dependent School District where a large part. of the Federal impact comes from families living off the property and stationed on or work- ing on Federal property. In asking for these changes in H.Tt 6230 I would like to furrnsh re- cent. information on the school district I now serve, commenting briefly on the Federal impact along with the non-Federal pupil growth. The Ysleta Indepemident School District is one of the more heavily impacted distric.ts in this area receiving aid under Public Law 874. For instance, in the school year 1951-52 there was a total of 728 federally connected students in attendance in the Ysleta Independent PAGENO="0599" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1421 School District with a total of 4,737 students in rnelnl)ersllip at. the end of the school year. This means that 15 percent of the students were federally connected. In the school year 1965-66 there were 5,216 students federally con- nected out of a total membership of 25,307 or 21 percent federally con- nected. In the current year, 1966-67 there are 7,( 99 students federally connected, with a membership at present of 27,223 students, showing 26 percent. federally connected. This means that the membership in the Ysleta Independent School District, has increased 1,916 students since the school year 1965-66 or 1 year ago. Also during this same time the increase in Federal students in the district for the year has been 1,883, or almost as much as the increase of all students in the district for the past year. The impact has grown not only in numbers but percentage wise as well. This legislation has been commonly referred to as impact legisla- tion. May I point out that the impact of federally connected students in the Ysleta Independent. School District, for the school year 1966-67 is approximately 26 percent of the membership, while the estimated entitlement of all sections of Public. Law 874 is oniy 9 percent of the current budget. This simply means that the local district is putting forth a great effort to meet. this problem. The continuation in its present form of Public Law 874 would protect the school districts in federally impacted areas in planning their budgets for the school year 1968-69 an(l this information is needed early in 1968 so that school officials may plan to meet. the impact area problems. Present legislation would allow the temporary provision of Public Law 815, which affects students whose parents live off and work on Federal property, to expire June 30, 1967. This section would be ex- tended to expire June 30, 1972, the same as other proposed amendments, to protect school districts like the Ysleta Independent School District where a large part of t.he Federal impact comes from families living off the property and stationed or working on Federal property. For instance, a growth in number of Federal students would require building aid. The continued increase in federal activity in this area would certainly create a problem if this section of Public Law 815 were to expire June 1967. Since the school yea.r 1960-61 the Ysleta. Independent School Dis- trict has provided more than $15 million from local funds ill an effort to house st.udents in this fast growing impacted school district.. This shows that a great effort. is being made to provide facilities for all students in the district. It. can easily be seen that over a period of years there is a direct relation between the Federal growth and non- Federal growth. In conclusion, I wish to thank the committee for the privilege of appearing before it in behalf of the proposed Federal impact program amendments under H.R. 6230. I sincerely urge that. this committee ass J-LR. 6230 at. an early date and that. the expiration dates of Public aw 874 amid Public Law 815, which affect students whose parents live off and work on Federal property, be extended to June 30, 1972, so that these laws will continue to render service to thosuands of school- children over this Nation. PAGENO="0600" 1422 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Chairman PERKINs. Thank you very much, Mr. Hanks. As usual Oscar Rose for many, many years has spearheaded the drive to make sure that the Congress did not destroy the impacted legislation. You are here with a most outstanding panel and I appreciate the statements of all of you distinguished educators. I regret that I did not hear all of these statements but I have tried to glance through all of the statements here on my desk. Your contributions have been great and your contributions have been great throughout the years in assist- ing this committee in writing this legislation and helping to keep us on the right track. Mr. ROSE. Thank you, Mr. Perkins. Chairrnaii PERKINS. Mr. Rose, we have a situation at Fort Knox, Ky., Commonwealth of Kentucky states that they do not have the authority to participate in the education of any of the children on Government property and the legislation that is now proposed pro- vides that if the State does not participate by June 30, 1969, that there will be no Federal assistance. I am wondering whether you have had complaints of a similar nature from different States? Or is it only peculiar to Kentucky? I certainly have not heard of any other complaints. Mr. ROSE. There are no other States which have a similar restriction in connection with this matter. However I am not completely familiar with it. Last year I testified and I mentioned again in my testimony this morning, I believe after all I left, that the impact area schools of any State should not be saddled with or required to modify the normal State taxes within a State. After all we are only 4,000 districts and a great many more than that in the United States and in the various States we only represent a few, so our political influence within a State is not only always sufficient to protect ourselves. So I think that the State law is not of our making as the impact area people. Thus we should be very careful in eliminating funds within a State under the impacted area legislation, 874, in particular, prior to the State having an opportunity and a rather lengthy opportunity to modify its laws so that the Federal Government's intent would not be abrogated or would not be eliminated. Chairman PERKINS. It is common knowledge that in this particular area that the Harding County School Board could not iake over Fort Knox without many years of planning and Fort Knox after many years of planning. undoubtedly the Hardin County school district would lose money. But assuming Kentucky did participate and assuming they did par- ticipate only to a limited degree and the Government would continue to operate. the school at Fort Knox, then would the State lose any money under this statute? Mr. ROSE. I do not think they would. I think there is a rather liberal interpretation of just how this particular amendment would be applied. Chairman PERKINS. I would like to ask Mr. Lillywhite to comment on the question. Assuming Kentucky participated and recognized in the education to a limited degree on the Federal property in the PAGENO="0601" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDITCATION AMENDMENTS 1423 Fort Knox area, would the 1-lardin County Board of Education then lose any money as a result of that statute, Mr. Lillywhite, this proposed change? Mr. LILLYwIIvr~. I would be glad to comment on that now if you wish or if you want. to wait until these. people are through I could get on my regular testimony. Chairman PERKiNS. Go ahead and comment right now. Mr. ROSE. May we invite Mr. Lillywhite t.o join us? Mr. Chairman, may I say for the record that the Office of Education in its adminis- tration of 874 and 815 has ever been conscious of the value done by the impact area legislation as we know it now and many years before that. So we have no complaint what ever to make with the dedicated help that the Office of Education has given to us especially from this particular division. For the record I might say that, and I am sure these members know it but Mr. Lillywhite was very influential in the administration of the legislation for impacted area schools prior to the enactment of 815 and 874 and of course went with the committee throughout the Nation t.hat held on the site hearings determining the need for a permanent, more adequate solution to this problem. Chairman PEIn~INs. Do you remember the question, Mr. Lillywhite? I am sorry for the interruption. Mr. LILLY\VHITE. For the record. I am B. L. Lillywhite, Assistant Commissioner of the U.S. Office of Education in charge of t.he Federal impact area program. The whole question that you raise, Mr. Perkins, is quite a complex one. It is not extensive in the country. I will just answer your specific question first and t.hen if you want to pursue it further then OK. The amendment provides that if 2 years after it was passed- last year-the school districts still refuse to or the St.ates still refuse to provide public education for children living on Federal property, that property will not be Federal after that time for the purposes of the two acts. Now we come into this amendment with a number of Federal oper- ations under section 6 already underway on Fort Knox and Fort Campbell a.nd five other minor places in Kentucky as well as a number in other St.ates in the Union--not a large number. There are about 25 major such as major operations in the country and then there are about 25 small ones in one State. If the attorney general of the State of Kentucky rules "yes" we will provide State aid for the children living on Fort Knox and Fort Campbell if and when the Federal operation is terminated, there would be no penalty whatever now. I am certain that the termination will not take place for a number of years. These are big operations. Fort Knox has the largest number of children on any base in the United States - 5,700 this year. You can't turn over that kind of an operation to Hardin County without an awfully lot of planning and some pretty strong assurances that they are going to continue to get support to do it. Fort Campbell is almost as large. If the States, therefore, signify they are willing to provide free public education for the children and they can do it. with the proviso that if and when the Federal PAGENO="0602" 1424 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS operation is discontinued, the penalties will not be asse.ssed against the school districts. You will remember also Mr. Perkins, the Quantico amendments. Chairman PERKINS. I certainly do. Mr. LILLYwIJITE. Now we cannot just discontinue a Federal oper- ation until after the procedure set up in that bill is followed which means that the commissioner and the head of the agency having jurisdiction over the property both agree that a local school district can educate the children satisfactorily and that the Federal operation ought to be discontinued and turned over to them. But we think generally if States are going to receive money, most of them in the ITnion provide State aid and free public education for all of the kids but there are a few who won't. We think it only fair that they be willing to provide State aid and the local school districts accept responsibility for their education and this is all the amendnients attempt to do. I would say one other thing. I thought I had a reasonably good understanding with your assistant State superintendent, Mr. Melton, I think, the last time on the telephone whereby he feels now that they could make some kind of a certification as to what they could provide under State aid if this Federal operation stopped and I told him I wished he would send it up and maybe it would get by already but I don't know for sure. Chairman PEIuUNS. I just do not feel until we. get. a. little better understanding down there that we ought to press too fast.. I agree with you that a. lot, of this is completely sound in my judgment., but don't you think it would be all right to postpone the effective date, for another year until June 30. 19~0, and see if we cannot. get a favorable ruling down there. Mr. LILLYwmTE. I would have to say this, Mr. Perkins, that we have gone to an awful lot of effort now since the amendment was passed in working out with the various States arrangements so t.hat they would be se.t. up and would not have to suffer the penalties and most of them all can do it. Chairman PERKINS. I a~ree with you, Mr. Lillywhite, except. I know some school people and you know some and sometimes the people you deal with do not do it as effectively as you should do it and since there is some confusion, can you see any objection to postponing the dat.e a year, Mr. Rose'? Mr. ROSE. I was going to say, Mr. Perkins, being a school superin- tendent that tries to educate a rather difficult school system as far as finances are c.oncerned, we may get a little jumpy at the possibilities of changes that, as I noticed in Mr. Burkehead's testimony from Hardin County, would completely destroy the school program. We feel a. responsibility to our schoolchildren that we just. cannot let tha.t happen. It is not a matter of what happens to the school administrators but being responsible for them as I say we are just a little bit concerned about any change on the face of it. that would seem to be so drastic. I am c.ertain that Mr. Burkehead insofar as he could would encour- age the State attorney of Kentucky to eliminate this seemingly unwill- ingness on the part of t.he State to conform with what other States do PAGENO="0603" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1425 but I would say again that while you said Hardin County couldn't assume their responsibility, then neither can they assume the respon- sibility of what the attorney general is going to do or what the State legislature is going to do. May I say this: One of the serious things in Oklahoma that I have had to combat is the fact. that the general people in the State legis- lature think that the Midwest (~itv school district is a plush, well- ftnanced school system when in reality it is not. Therefore, I can see where the State of Kentucky might think like the State of Oklahoma. We do not need to be concerned about Mid- west Cit.y because they have all of this Federal money but they don't have as much money to educate a child as the State of Kentucky does or in the State of Oklahoma in the case of a Midwest City. Mr. LILLYWHITE. Let me finish up by saying two things. Chairman PERKINS. But you see no difficulty in postponing the effective date? Mr. ROSE. No. sir; I do not. Mr. LILLYWHITE. If you decide to postpone it a year I don't think it is going to be any great problems if you do, but I would hope you would state in the report in connection with the deferral, if you do it, that you intend to go through with this. This gives States and school districts time to make the arrange- ments so it does not cut the ground out from under us in trying to get the Federal Government out of the business of running schools. We don't want to run schools. Michigan had three of them and they have already transferred the full responsibility to local school districts and they did that before this amendment was ever set up. Mr. FORD. I certainly do not want to put Mr. Rose and his people on the spot wit.h the chairman of the committee, but I don't think you gentlemen can conic here and make a. presentation about the tremen- dous burden we put on your local school distr~c.t by a Federal installa- tion that adds kids to the Federal school system anti say that is the reason we ought to give you Federal fumis over 874 and 815 to offset that burden and then sit there and agree that it. is all right, for a State to receive the nioney from the. Federal Govermuent, have a Federa.I installation there but not. accept those children or make any pro\nision for those children in the public school. I was not aware until last. year wheii we got into this that it was possible t.o have a State provide not ~1 of local or State money for the education of federally connected children and yet claim them as a Federal impact. I suspect if that was very widely publicized across the country, the next time you fellows come back before the Congress for 815 or 874 money you might have a. little trouble. I i1~~se you will, if the provision added by this committee was cut off b the Appropriation Committee by a little amendment that. said no new impact area would be taken into consideration. I am talking about cities like New York, Chicago, Detroit., and a lot of others t.hat have many thousands of federally impacted children. It pains me t.o take issue with anybody in Kentucky because I know how sincerely the people wante.d t.o help the chairman of this commit- PAGENO="0604" 1426 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS tee earlier but I think the record shows he is having some problems in helping these people.. Chairman PERKINS. I agree with the gentleman from Michigan that any Federal installation is an economic benefit to that local school district. I feel that the State should recognize that fact, should make recognit.ion of it. I feel if all of us belabored under the impression down there, and I understand the Attorney General has ruled other- wise, that the Commonwealth of Kentucky has no right to participate in the education of children strictly on Federal property, I think he is altogether wrong. I view it. as a great economic benefit, and I think with some more persuasion within a reasonable period of time we will get the legisla- ture. Mr. Foim. I think it. would be very persuasive if those people had the money cut off and had to go to him instead of coming here. Mr. Chairman, there is nothing that puts l)l'essui'e on like pinching some- body's pocketbook. Chairman PERKINS. I agree with you, Mr. Ford, that that is true, and I know all committees on this legislation have tried to be as reason- able and sometimes perhaps have leaned over backwards in being reasonable, but I certainFv do not intend to ask for any other postpone- ment. beyond June 30, another year. I agree with you, we ought t.o write something in there tmd let's put them on notice and say this is the last time that we are going to make this extension. I don't know how many schools or States or which are involved. Do you know, Mr. Lillywhite? Mr. LILLYWIIITE. Yes, Mr. Chairman, there are not more than half a dozen. Chairman PERKINS. I think Tennessee, maybe Georgia- Mr. FORD. 1-Tow much money are you paying out now? Mr. LTLLYWHITE. Under 874 w-e are paying out for Federal opera- tions $27 million in the budget. for 1968 for 50,300 children expected to he on Federal property. This is because States are unable because of State law or the educa- tion is unsuitable. Most of those States have already worked out the arrangement. so that. the penalty would not apply and they would be willing, when the Federal operations terminate, to provide the State aid and the local funds to operate schools. There are just two or three which are still problems. Chairman PERKINS. I think we have a lot of progress in this direc- t.ion in the last 4 or 5 years or 8 to 10 years in getting the Federal Government. out of this business. Mr. MEEDS. I might suggest that the chairman do what I am doing at this time. I don't. know how long you will be able t.o hold out but I have a number of school districts in my State which have for several years been taking fimcls in lieu of taxes and have been taking funds and putting them into capital investment, instead of per pupil expenditure. When we changed the law last year to provide against this I received letters from every one of them inveighin~ against the provision or at. least. askin~ that we extend it 1 year. So far I have not succumbed to this pressure but. T don't think these schools are en- PAGENO="0605" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1427 titled to have their cake and eat it, too. I think this is a good bill, the purpose of it is proper but a~ school districts, such as some of my own have done, very purposely taken fuiids which they should not have taken. I don't think they have any right to kick when they are cut off. Mr. ROSE. Mr. Chairman, I would like to make one other statement. It has been my observation over the years in trying to make what seems to rather drastic local changes, if we schedule them out over a period of years, say 3 or 4 years, the impact is less objectionable. Frankly what I would say, rather than say extending it, the thing we are talking about here is the State ought to pay for those children the same amount that they pay for the other children. So, if t.he first year they would be charged back with a part of the Federal funds and next year a part of the Federal funds, the next year a part of the Federal funds, then we would impress on the State officials over which parole, Burkehead and Hardin and a few other counties have no control whatever and something has to be done. Either they finance the schools which they destroy, where they destroy the budgets or they finance all children. They are given that choice and that is the way I would approach this program. I don't think as Mr. Meeds said that they ought to have their cake and eat it, too. On the other hand, I cannot help but be sympathetic with individual school districts. Let's take four or five district.s in Kentucky. They cannot tell the legislature what to do and as long as there is no penalty assessed, then there is no progress made. I think that this committee can work out a program which would encourage Kentucky and the other States Mr. Lillywhite mentioned fall in line with the theory of this particular legislation. I think the same thing is true, frankly, with the States that charge back a part of their impact against the State agency. As has been said here, the installations that we say cause district impact are not a problem to the States where they exist. They are an economic boon to the States where they exist. I rather regret coming here to emphasize the need for impact area legislation when I know that a great deal of it is going to reduce the part of educational cost that the States are assuming. I don't know how you handle that problem but I think again it is the two principles that I mentioned, and that is that the local district should have an equal amount of funds to provide an educational pro- gram with and they should also maintain a level of ethics equal to other schools and the impact area program could never be sold to this Congress on the basis of State's economy. It just could not be done. Mr. FORD. You just touched on another aspect of the impact legisla- tion that we considered last year for which we could not come up with an answer. We went to the west coast and again I was distressed to discover that a school district in Mr. Meeds district-I believe it was out in Olympia-received some money and then the State of Washington took it back away from them by deducting it, in effect, from their State aid. PAGENO="0606" 1428 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS This is inconsistent with eveiwthing else we have done in legislation where we try to help a school district and some other agency of gov- ernment takes advantage of the benefit we give them to spread it around to other PeoPle. I was informed when we were holding these hearings last year there were some 14 or 1~ States that comingle our impact aid with general State aid in some fashion by charging it off agamst the local district or putting it into the common pot as one of the several devices that is used. While we were faced with the first, immediate problem of getting the legislatioii reenacted without too man changes we hoped the bill would pass. I would hope your people would give some serious thought t& some of the backlash we might face down the road if we don't put our house in order. \Ve are talking about a principle here which is equally Important as the problem in Mr. Perkins State. When we compare the amounts of money that are. involved in solving the prob- lem wInch Mr. Perkins has expressed so clearly against the prOI)lem we have with these States that are not. using the money for the impact children, we are facing a numl)er of votes out there on that floor where one. day the entire impact is going to be serious. I don't think it is too soon to soimdi that note of alarm. Mr. LIr~LYwHIm. You will remember, Mr. Chairman, you did make a start on t.his program which the board was talking about which said if the State reduced its State aid in this current year per pupil below what it was in the pre.ceding year we will reduce correspondingly the amount for every applicant ea.ch year. It. takes a year to get the data. in. Chairman PERKINS. I agree with Mr. Ford's reasoning and with t.he statement that was made. As I understood Mr. Lillywhite awhile ago, he st.ated if the State of Kentucky was participating in the education of Federal children on Federal property, that the local Federal agency would not lose any Federal funds-in other words, receive as much Federal funds a.s they are receiving at the present time. Is that your statement, Mr. Lillywhite? Mr. Ln~L~vHiTE. Did I understand the question to be if they were participating. Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Mr. LILLYwHITE. There would be no penalties attached in the law if they took the responsibility for educating the children. It is only when they refuse to recognize this is a part of the State and say we wouldn't provide free public, education for these children when the penalties apply. You have t.o recognize in that amendment when you already have an on-going Federal operation, even though a State takes action and says yes. we will educate these children, they are not going to have to dc it ~until we can make arrangeme1its~to discontinue Federal operation by the. procedures set up under the bill. Chairman PERKINS. It will be several years before Hardin County can take over Fort. Knox. Mr. LILLY'\VIIITE. Kentucky could take the initiative now and the.y would still not. suffer any pe.nalty unt.il we reach that. time. Chairman PERKINS. There might. be. much controversy clown there whether the State could do these things. I think there is not. much PAGENO="0607" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1429 doubt about it and I think the attorney general should have ruled otherwise. I think all of us will agree extending t.he date will be reasonable to put these States on notice once and for all they have to move in this direction. Mr. HAGENESS. As the representative here from the State of Wash- ington I would be very happy to get a CO~~ of the transcript of Mr. Ford's remarks that I could take back to show some of our legislators right now because we are having that problem. Mr. FORD. I said it on television out there last year; maybe you didn't hear it. Mr. HAGENESS. I would be glad to have it repeated. I do want to make this statement however in a State that equalizes, as the Stat.e of Washington, where there is a guaranteed figure statewide per pupil, the State does have some right. As I explained this morning, there are some things about impact districts that the State and legislature as a whole do not understand but I think they would understand a statement of this kind and it would help us to clarify the picture. We need to do something. Mr. FORD. Mr. Chairman, could we go one further step. We did examine the possibility of a formula. Take for example, your State. As I recall, it is 65/35 percent. Mr. HAGENESS. It is less than that now but it is around 60 percent. Mr. FORD. One approach to this might be to build a formula into this bill which equalizes the Federal aid with State aid given to the local district~ whether it be ~ pei(eilt or Go 1)en'ellt or ~ percent.. If the State is giving you 65 percent of your local money then they can take into consideration G5 pertent of your Federal fund in work- ing out the utilization but. not 1()() percent of your }ederal funds because they do not do it with the State money so why should they do it with Federal money? Mr. MEEDS. I am not in entire agreement with the approach of the State of Washington, but it is heavily financed by the State. Under our State law, a.nd correct me if I am wrong, 80 percent of these impact funds will be counted in 1969. Mr. HAGENESS. In 1968 you are right, it will be 85 percent. Mr. MEEDS. `We would appreciate that kind of amendment from you, Mr. Ford, to take care of that problem prior to 1969. I could hardly sponsor it. Chairman PERKINS. Let me say that the State of Washington and the State of Michigan are really well represented here. Mr. HAGENESS. We appreciate it, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Steiger. Mr. S'rEIG~. Mr. Chairman, thank you. Mr. Rose, let me try to get clear, and I have gone through your testimony and I listened to you this morning and in checking through the bill and then rereading your testimony I will admit that I have some problems deciding where you think we ought to amend as com- pared to where the bill suggests we do amend. You now agree that it would be possible to delay the date 1 year, is that correct, for the impact area PAGENO="0608" 1430 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. ROSE. Yes, and I would like to say this, Mr. Steiger. Cer- t.aiiily 1 year after it has been going on 17 is not going to cause any great catastrophe if it can be rectified within another year then I would say yes. Mr. SIM~IoNs. I was just going to suggest that I once researched this topic and I find the first court decision on this was in 1821 so I don't think it is really only 17 years old. Mr. RosE. I referred as to the damage that it did to the impacted area program. It has only been in existence as we now know it, I believe, for the 17 years and thus it has never come up before. Up until the first of last year is the first I ever heard of it and thus tak- ing ample time to remedy the situation would not be as I said-would not cause catastrophic damage. Mr. STEIGER. You also, in your statement regarding Public Law 874, if I remember correctly, and I am trying to find it and I cannot, but I think you say the concept of the last ~scal year should not be continued. Mr. RosE. No, the Commissioner testified with reference to the disaster aid being limited to the level of t.he last full year of need within the school district should be eliminated because we were progressrng. I simply used his argument there to say that if it was sounded with reference to section 3 because we have a 2-year lag there, and I think to 2-year lag is the biggest problem in this whole program. Mr. STEIGER. I appreciate your clarifying that. One more clari- fication from my standpoint since I have not had the benefit of the chairman's or Mr. Meeds' and Mr. Ford's expertise in this field before. Can you give me some brief understanding of the discussion that you carry on in your testimony about what I think you called the grouping of similar schools within a State. Could you give me some benefit of what you are talking about ~ Mr. ROSE. Last year the House recommended that. every school in a St.ate be placed within a group with no designation of how the groups would be formed and that whatever the local contribution rate of that group in which a group fell, that. would be their rate. Previous to that and for that matter as to the present, it is on a local contribution rate of comparable schools. That., of course, places the impact area in a group and one of the faults of that. is its low-contribution rate affects the aggregate. Then that is what. the school gets. That type of a program is more easily administered because then you just fall in that group and there is no argument as to whet.her the schools are comparable or whether they are not.. That is determined through the State department of education the same as the comparable school group which a given school would select. I think there a.re some 17 or 18 States t.hat use the group rating now. I do not all together fall out with it. I think it has more sound- ness than the 2-year lag does. I still say the same thing that I said about. introducing this other change that might be good, that it takes a little time to do that, so if my suggestion is if they hold the group rates, they remove t.he 2-year lag and go to 1 year and then they make the provision saying the school gets no less rate than it got last year. PAGENO="0609" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1431 In our ever-increasing local contribution rate, and I mentioned that Oklahoma incrensed its tax levying possibilities by 40 percent a year ago, that we will soon catch up with that without hurting the schools financial approach. Mr. STEIGER. Would any of the others of you be willing-if we can pass over impact area for a moment-would you be willing to give me the benefit of your thinking about. such questions as, for example, whether we ought to transfer title III's responsibility from the Office of Education to a State plan operation ? Mr. RosE. I don't know whether I would be competent to specifically comment on that but I think any educational program, if at all pos- sible, should be administered through the designated agency within a St.ate for the administration of the State educational program. I do not know about t.his one. Whether that would prevent the new concept that. we have and which has been paramount, frankly, in getting legislation enacted whether that would eliminate the relation- ship that we have tried to build up between public and private schools or not. I don't know. Mr. TAYLOR. May I respond t.o that a moment., Mr. Steiger? Mr. STEIGER. Yes. Mr. TAYLOR. Corning from Colorado, I understand under title III we had the highest percent of programs funded as any in t.he Nation and I believe t.his is still right. We found that many of our so-called good programs and programs we thought were best were not accepted perhaps at the. Federal level because there was a lack of understanding as to what t.he needs might be in the State. Although I am not, dissatisfied with the present way, I believe we could strengthen t.he program by having t.he State departments, strong State departments of education, have a greater say in it. They are the people more closely associated with the problems. Mr. Si~r~roxs. I t.hink on this question we need a statement from the Office of Education as to how much weight. they do give to the recommendations of the St.ate departments of education in the various States on the project submitted. I can say, having been party to this for some time, that whether or not a plan has been adopted by a State that. the Office of Education to my knowledge very seldom if ever has moved without. a recommenda- tion from the State educational agency in regard to that type of project. Mr. STEIGER. It has moved in a very small number of cases. Mr. Si~r~ioxs. Very small, and I suppose the question comes up whether or not. you said they first had to pass that. approval in the State agency and whether or not that would indeed do more damage than under the present arrangement. Mr. STEIGETi. In your view it might tend to do more damage? Mr. STM~Ioxs. I suppose the question could come up in my own mind-and this is my Own pei~soiial opinion rather than the group I represent-I sometimes wonder if on this I)articular type of project we are discussing whether or not. the very separateness within a State sometimes would not because of the organization of that State in Ti-492-67--It. 2---39 PAGENO="0610" 1432 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS terms of metropolitan versus urban communities, if it would not work t.o the disadvantage of innovative progress for the types of boys and girls that are suppose.d to be helped by t.he approach. Mr. ROSE. I would like to make another statement. about title III. The only experience that. I have was that t.he State department ap- prove the title III program for the school which I administer and the U.S. Office disapprove it and the State department didn't give us any leadership or guidance in what was wrong with our project when we submitted it but gave us tacit approval and t.his is a matter of record with no criticism, we will say of how we should have better opposed it. We have reopposed it. this year and we have not had an answer on whether our project. would acceptable or whether it would not be. ~rr. ~\IEEDS. Would the. gentleman from Wisconsin yield? Mr. STEIGER. I certainly will. Mr. MEEDS. If \VC went ahead under this title V in section 5(b) and somehow (Ihallge(i this so that State educational agencies such as we would define them in the bill rather than the Governor or someone were to enter into a comprehensive plan for education in the State, they would necessarily then have to work with local school districts and large urban centers in drawing this plan up. Would this not put them in a more knowledgeable position and couldnt we then look perhaps toward a little more control or a little more say frommi the State departments of education than we might be justified in lookin~ to them for now in some instances, not all, in fact, but very few. Mr. SI3Droxs. My reaction to that, Mr. Meecls, is this. I would hope that ~oii always have some title in this very fine Elementary and Secondary Act that we are certainly enjoying in metropolitan areas in Michk~an. that you always have a chance for innovation t.hat does not. necessarily fit a State plan l)ecause., indeed, my experience during the last. 2~ ears is it is sometimes the compromises that are worke.d nut. in terms of developing a state-wide plan which do not always per- mit. the kind of innovation that. von people try to do in the Elementary and ~econdarv Education Act. The only thing I am su~gesting is that first of all I don't think this should be in the hands of the Governor or anyone else. I think see- ondlv there ought to be some kind of an opportunity even where you have a well-organized State department that this is not just a nice comfortable State plan and some school districts become innovated they will have some redress to the act that you have written. Chairman PERKINS. Let. me say we have eight distinguished mem- bers of this panel and we have Mr Liliywhite, and I would like to know if the panel has any comment.s in connection with Commissioner I-lowe's testimony when he referred to some prospective amendments to section 14 of Public Law 815 and I certainly would like to have Mr. Lillvwhite document. for the record just what those amendments involve and how they change the present law. Go ahead, Mr. Liflywhite on the amendments t.hat are before the committee. Mr. LILLYWHITE. Do you want a description only of the amendments to section 14 or do you want anything said about the other amendments referred to in the Commissioner's testimony. PAGENO="0611" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1433 Chairman PERKINS. You can run through all of these amendments. Mr. LILLYWHITE. The first ones will be very brief. We got dis- aster assistance given to the Oflice of Education under Public Law 89-313. That is the repair and rebuilding of schools destroyed in major disasters or damaged or destroyed in major disasters. In November 1965 that had a life of 2 years. We have had this year and a half operation under it.. Chairman PERKINS. Has it worked well? Mr. LTLLYWHITE. It has. It took us a little while to get acquainted with it aiid they made it retroactive to cover Hurricane. Betsy when commitments were made by t.he operating agency and it took a bit of doing to get squared away 3 months after the damage occurred and one authority made certain commitments to 25 or 30 school districts down there as to what they would do. Chairman PERKINS. I remember the situation. WTe had it on the floor then. Mr. LILLY-WHITE. We are working that out. but. the disaster assist- ance legislation has seemed to me to work with a remarkably small cost. We have not had any major disasters like Betsy but there were 11 last year and two this year. The total cost so far t.o this Office is less than $500,000. The ques- tion might~ be raised why is it necessary to have such authority if the aniount is so small. I think that the answer to that would be something like this, that it is highly important to the few school districts that are involved. Most States have good insurance programs. B~~t the insurance does not take care of all of it and there are certain types of things such as water damage t.hat cannot be insured against. So, to have the authority there so that they know they can go ahead and make the repairs so children can get back in school, and when the building is destroyed have some authority to help them set up a tem- porary school so the children can go to school while they are rebuilding the school, it sems to me is worth while having. Now we found just two or three things in it that we have recom- mended for technical changes. One of them is something like this. Most of the repair damage to disasters is putting on a roof, refinishing t.he floor, putting in windows, buying new supplies and equipment, and this is done normally by a school district with its operating funds. We have an amendment in there that just adds, the 874 part of the amendment "repair" so we can just do it normaly like the school dis- tricts do it. That is a very small one. Another one is we want to put a dim inimus on the amount for assist- ance. Wrhen you make a field trip up to northern Minnesota on the Red River Valley or in South Dakota or some other place where the Red River overflowed we get an application in here for ~50. The law contains authority for us to grant assistance over a 5-year period on a diminishing l)asiS each year if the eeononmv of the com- munity is destroyed to the extent where they can pro~cle assistance but it says you can operate schools at the level time full year preceding that or the (lisaSter. Costs, as you know, are going up and von (lout 0l)e~ite at the same level so we are asking them to take out the "at the level.~' Time other one is the extension of the law for a period of ~ years. PAGENO="0612" 1434 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMET~TS That is all there is on disasters. There is only one minor amendment to 814 and that is a change iii the definition of Federal property. We are supposed to make deduc- tions for payments made with respect to Federal property including payments on property held in lease by private citizens. We found payments made to a district in Oklahoma and one in Arizona that were never re.ported to the Office. So we had paid the district the full amount of the money. Chairman PERKINS. Assuming that the leased property, several thousand acres, was leased by the military installation for farming purposes. Then would they not be considered federally connected children? Mr. LILLYWHITE. We are not talking about federally connected children at all. We are talking only about deductions. When we went to collect the deductions, the district would not pay. We turned one over to the General Accounting Office and we took the other one to the court and we lost in both cases. The court threw it out for this reason. It is the technical wording of the definition of Federal property. Both of these were on land held in trust for individual Indians or Indian tribe.s and not. land owned by the United States, and the word- ing of the law refers to land owned by the United States or leased therefrom. The lease is not therefrom. It. is leased from the Indians on which there is a restriction on alienation. This is all the change there. It just clears up what the Congress intended to do. The others are the amendments to section 14. When these laws were first passed. Indian reservations were included the same as other~ areas but they didn't have increases in school enrollment like those cha.racterized by a military installation so nobody was eligible for assistance, yet, there were still thousands of Indian children on reservations that did not have schools to go to. So in 1953 after the first 2 years you amended this law and put in section 14 to provide a kind of a special arrangement adapted to those districts that. have large Indian reservations. That program has worked ver well. You put a limitation on $20 million, then $40 million, then $60 million. We spent $54.8 million. The school district constructed with money 1,789 classrooms to house about 49,000 children. That is about 50 percent of all of the Indian children in public schools. But there are a few problems now that are emerging that are not covered by this provision and the purpose of the amendment is to make this a little bit more liberal to meet the problems that exist. The Bureau of Indian Affairs appearing before the Senate Com- mittee on Appropriations last year were urged to make a study of the need for Federal funds for construction of school facilities in local districts for Indian childre.n living on reservations. If a need was found to report by January 15 and provide language to meet that need. The Bureau of Indian Affairs does not, have a.ny program or au- thority to build school facilities or grant money to build school facilities for school districts educating Indian children. They build residential schools but not to grant money for construc- tion of school. They have about $10 million a year under the PAGENO="0613" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1435 *Johnson-O'Malley Act. So the Bureau of Indian Affairs came to this office and said you have the authority under section 14. Now why don't we work with you and revise this legislation to the point where it makes this need. We find there is a need existing so we agreed that we would work together to come up with some amendments. So I think the way the Senate Committee wanted it done this way has special requests, a dozen or so a year to appropriate $1,500,000 to build a school in this area. They have no way of evaluating those requests on a regular basis so they wanted some kind of regular on-going program for us. We have developed amendments to section 14. They have been referred to the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The Bureau has wholeheartedly endorsed them and sent that recommenda- tion to the Bureau of the Budget. As of this moment they have been cleared by parts of the clearance apparatus in the Bureau of the Budget but not the final clearance. We expect that it will be cleared so I am now authorized to describe for you t.he amendments. I cannot say they have been cleared or that they will be forthcoming. I think that they probably will be but I don't know. That is the status of it. The amendments I will get to very simply. Under the present section 14 we count in a local school district the children living on reservations and if they have a substantial per- centage of those children that are unhoused without school facilities and they don't have enough money in there total bonding capacity and all other sources to build t.he facilities, then we can grant the money to build the facilities for them. If they have part enough money, we can grant only the difference. If you go over here to section 5~ the program these people have been talking about and if a school district~ has an increase in children enough to meet the eligibility requirement they get the grant~ of money no matter how wealthy the children are. They get the rate specified in the law per child. So, here you have some of the poorest~ most dis- advantaged districts in the Nation being required to spend every dime they have in their bonding capacity to provide the facilities before they get the Federal money or only get the difference between the cost and what their total resources are. So the first part of the amendment goes strictly to the children on Indian reservations and it provides generally like this: If they meet the eligibility requirement, the substantial percentage, and they have nnhoused children, the Commission will grant the money. The burden and need problem is taken out for the on-reservation children. Most of them are poor districts. Most of the children in the districts are among the most disadvantaged w-e have in the Nation. This is an effort to get some school facilities to places where they just do not have enough money to build schools. Mr. MEEDS. Statistics show the birth rate of these people is four times the national average, am I correct.? Mr. LILLYWHITE. They are increased. Mr. MEEDS. Four times the national average? Mr. LIu~rwHIm. Yes. Now the second part of the amendment goes to the whole situation in a school district in which there is an Indian reservation and looks PAGENO="0614" 1436 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMEN'I'S at the entire problem because a lot of children migrate off the reserva- tion and they are squatters and they cause these problems. Again we put back the burden and effort problem the way we had it so if the school district meets the burden and effort, then you count the total problem in the school district toward the substantial percentage and deal with it. that. way. I just might say that when von face a. small school district within a very large area but not too many people and a large part of it is in nontaxable Federal property and is peopled by a growing population that doe.s not pay taxes and there is very little taxable wealth outside that reservation, those people are very reluctant. to build housing for the Indian children. They have a hard enough time to get the money to build school facilities for children, so these amendments simply try t.o meet that. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much, Mr. Lillywhite. We appreciate your coming here and we appreciate the entire planning and it has been so helpful to us all through the years. Now, perhaps. if von have the time, you can step aside and not leave the room because I want the members to interrogate as long a.s they want to interrogate after we hear about eight more witnesses. We will come on around the school board people now. Mr. ROSE. Mr. Chairman, let me say this is the best opportunity we have ever had to tell our story. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much, Mr. Rose. We want to see you back here many more times in the. future. Paul N. Carlin. director of the Federal and Congressional Relations in the National School Boar(lS Association. We have Dr. Harold V. Webb. executive director of the National School Boards Association: and Dr. Joseph Ackerman, president of the National School Boards Association, Ehuhurst. Ill.; and Kenneth W. Lund, senior vice president-he is not a witness. He just re- mained. Do you have any other members here ? Mr. ACKERMAN. Ye~: ~\fr. hugh Calkins, a member of both the Cleveland School Board and our leuislative committee. Chairman PERKINS. Who is the chairman of the panel? Mr. CALKINS. Dr. Ackerman. Chairman PERKINS. Proceed We will withhold questioning until all of you make your statements. We are most anxious to hear your testimony. STATEMENTS OF JOSEPH ACKERMAN, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL SCHOOL BOARDS ASSOCIATION, AND HUGH CALKINS, LEGISLA- TIVE COMMITTEE, NATIONAL SCHOOL BOARDS ASSOCIATION; ACCOMPANIED BY PAUL N. CARLIN, DIRECTOR, FEDERAL AND CONGRESSIONAL RELATIONS, AND HAROLD V. WEBB, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL SCHOOL BOARDS ASSOCIATION Mr. MEEDS. I have to leave. May I make a. comment and ask one very brief question? Chairman PERKINS. Yes, indeed. Mr. MELDS. Dr. Ackerman, and you people who prepared testimony, may I say at. this time that it is certainly some of the most enlighten- PAGENO="0615" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1437 ing and precise testimony that has been presented t.o this committee, precise recommendation of what to do. I am particularl impressed with your work with regard to the expenditures of funds by National, State, and local governments and with your precise suggestiomis as to what we ought to do in the authorization and appropriation cases so we get by this impasse which we know has been created in funding of these programs. Also, your request. for full funding and all of your suggestions, may I say I agree heartily with them. 1-laying said that, now may I ask you one question. Last year, or 1965, you people were before this committee and gave some very good testimony with regard to this bill when it was initially before us, and I recall some of that. testimimony amid asked to get this prepared testimony. At that time you said Among the elements of control, XSBA believes initiative programming by local communities are the following: (1) the right to organize a school system in ternis of particular overall personnel; (2) the right to adapt facilities to local need~i : and ~) to regulate which funds available to the local district shall be expended as best determined by the Board of Education and the citizens of the local community. These were the caveats that you laid clown with your suppOrt. for this legislation. Now may I just. ask you if you think that you have been able to retain all of those things which were requested amid this, pretty well, from your standpoint.? Mr. ACKERMAN. Well, I would say I have certainly not heard a great deal of criticism on the way it has operated upon to this particular point. I think there are still some fears on the part of many school board people and there is certainly a hope that this local control will still be maintained. Mr. MEEDS. rfhank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairniaii. Chairman PERKTNS. Go ahead. Mr. ACKERMAN. I am Joe Ackerman, president of the National School Boards Association and member of the Elmhiurst (Illinois) Board of Education. I am accompanied by our executive director, Dr. Harold V. \Ve.bb, and then also our director of Federnl and con- gressional relations. Mr. Paul N. Carhiri. and also Mr. hugh Calkins, who is a meniber of the Cleveland School Board. lie, serves on our legislative. committee. The National School Boards Association is a nonprofit federation of the State school board associations of the 50 States, the District, of Columbia, and the Virgin Islands. Our association, through its mem- ber State school board associations represents more than S6.000 elected and appointed local school board members. These citizen leaders serve voluntarily on the governing hoards of their local school districts with- out compensation. In many communities, this amounts to a part-time assignment with virtually full-time responsibility. The National School Boards Association is the only national orga- nization representing local school boards and its primary objective is the strengthening of public education through active citizen participa- tion in t.he policymaking process of educating our children. PAGENO="0616" 1438 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDME~S I appreciate this opportunity, Mr. Chairman, to appear before your committee, on behalf of the National School Boards Association, to discuss the Elementary and Secondary Education Amendments of 1967. For the convenience of your committee, my remarks will be directed toward those major policy areas which are embraced by the two identical bills, H.R. 6230 by Congressman Perkins and H.R. 6236 by Congressman Brademas, that are officially before your committee for the purpose of these hearings. The annals of history will record the April 11, 1965, enactment of Public Law 89-10, the Elementary and Secondary Education Amend- ments of 1965, as one of the most significant educational landmarks of our generation. Webster defines landmark as "an event or development that marks a turning point." For local school boards, this "turning point" has resulted in the availability of a substantially higher level of Federal incentive funds and an activated public interest in both the total needs of public education and the special requirements of economically disadvantaged children. A direct result of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 has been a significant shift in the pattern of financing our Nation's public schools. During the current fiscal year, for example, the $28.3 billion in expenditures by our Nation's 21,684 operating public elementary and secondary school districts will come from the following sources: Federal, 8.1 percent-vis-a-vis 4.6 percent 3 years ago-State, 37.8 percent; and local, 54.1 percent. The turbulent nature of rapid change, with all of its frustrating and exciting manifestations, has never been more clearly evident than within today's local school districts. In an attempt to provide your committee with a current "grass- roots" appraisal of some of the major policy considerations implicit in the Elementary and Secondary Education Amendments of 1967, the National School Boards Association has recently distributed a six-point questionnaire to its key leadership. With the committee's permission, this analysis will be forwarded for inclusion in the hear- ing record as an integral part of our association's statement. The National School Boards Association offers the following rec- ommendations for further strengt.hening the purposes and objectives of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as pro- posed for amendment by ll.R. 6230 and H.R. 6236: FEDERAL APPROPRIATIONS TIMETABLE A serious practical dilemma confronting local school districts is caused by the incompatibility of the school year with the Federal legisiative calendar. For example, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare's appropriations bill was not approved last year until October 21, 1966, and the ESEA Amendments of 1966 (Public Law 89-750), which revised the distribution formula for title I, was not enacted into law until November 3, 1966. As a result of these two factors, it was not until February 23, 1967, that the State Departments of Education were advised of their ESEA. PAGENO="0617" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1439 title I maximum basic grants for fiscal year 1967. Numerous school districts still have not been apprised of their fiscal year 1967 alloca- tions even though less than three and a half months remain in the 1966-67 school year. The financial "pinch" came with the annual ratable adjustment provision (sec. 208 of Public Law 89-10, as amended by sec. 114 of Public Law 89-750), which this year reduced the national maximum amount authorized by nearly one-fourth. The $1.312 billion maximum amount authorized was reduced to $1.053 billion. After a further deduction for the outlying territories and State- operated programs, the amount left for local educational agencies was less than $1 billion ($989,935,591). While the administration has recommended a. 5-year extension of three major education programs a year before they are scheduled to expire, it was regrettable that a recommendation was not also made at this time to extend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 beyond its June 30, 1968, expiration date. A congressional extension of the ESEA program during the 1961 calendar year would allow local school boards to plan ahead in a.n orderly manner for assimilating any modifications in its program objectives or authorization levels. Since the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-10) is presently scheduled to expire on June 30, 1968: We recommend that Public Law 89-10 be extended, during the cur- rent calendar year, for a period of 5 years in order to encourage ion - range local planning and an orderly implementation of any modi - cat.ion in its program objectives or authorization levels. To ease the very real dilemma caused by the conflict between imple- menting most educational programs during the school year and the timing of Federal appropriations for these purposes: We recommend that Congress modify its existing appropriation procedures, insofar as it relates to the funding of programs for States and local educational purposes, so that eligible participants can be apprised during the early spring of each year, of the specific amounts that they will receive during the coming school year. STATE AND LOCAL SCHOOL BOARD PLANNING GRANTS While local school boards have long recognized the critical need for implementing systematic and comprehensive long-range planning pro- grams, other priorities have often prevailed in the competition for severely limited educational dollars. Those forward-looking school boards which are making a real effort to implement. local planning programs find themselves doubly thwarted. First, when State educational agencies are called upon for technical planning asssistance, it is seldom available bec.ause most of their per- sonnel Specialize in administrative, statistical a.nd curriculum supervision functions. Second, State and Federal funds, to asssist in meeting the financial costs associated wit.h hiring or providing personnel to work on a local long-range planning project., are presently available only under very PAGENO="0618" 1440 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS limited circumstances. By way of comparison, there are more than SO Federal planning grant programs available to other local and State governmental entities. Thoughtful school board members are also becoming increasingly apprehensive that. unless local school districts implement systematic and comprehensive long-range planning programs, then this planning and evaluation "vacuum" will be filled by noneducational and/or non- local sources. The National School Boards Association feels that the proposed coml)rehellsive educational planning amendment to title V of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. of 1965 offers a. far-reach- ing "opportunity" for strengthening and enhancing the. ability of local school districts to determine their own futures, provided that these grants are administered through the State educational agencies. lYe feel that such a. modification would further strengthen the leader- ship and service role which must increasingly be assumed by the State departments. IVe. recommend that the leadership resources of the State educa- t.ional agencies he further enhanced by amending the proposed 5-year program of grants to State and local education agencies by providing that these comprehensive educational planning and evaulation grants be administered through the State education agency. NATIONAL TEAChER CORPS The National School Boards Association endorses t.he. major revi- sions in the National rfeaclier Corps program, as provided for in H.R. 62~() and 11.JL 6~6. We are especially pleased1 with the amendment of the existing pro- gram to reinforce the concept of local control by further clarifying the local school board's absolute right to decide what Corps members are assi~'iied to its schools. The reduction of the. teacher-intern compensation rate to $75 per week plus ~15 per dependent. or the lowest rate for full-time teaching in the school system, whichever is less, will remove an existing pay disparity with fully qualified teachers already in the school system by conforming the compensation rate for these teacher-interns with the prevailing rate for graduate students or the local community's salary sea le. In addition, we fully support the requirement that. all proposals be approved by the State educational agency, including those training programs which are to be offered by the participating institution or university. A further amendment. to provide aut.hority for contracts with local school districts and universities over a 2-year period of service would allow participating school districts to more effectively plan for utiliz- ing the services of their "trained" teacher-interns during the corps- man's second year. We recommend that. the National Teacher Corps program be fur- tlier amended to provide authority for contracts with local school districts and universities for a 2-year period of service, and that this pilot program be continued a.s modified by the provisions of H.R. 6230 and H.R. 6'236. PAGENO="0619" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1441 FULL FUNDING OF TITLE I-SChOOL COXSTRLCTIOX The estimated ESEA title I authorization for fiscal year 196S was $2.4 billion vis-a-vis the actual budgetary request of the administra- tion for only one-half ($1.2 billion) of that amount. Though this budget figure estimate represents a 13-percent increase, a 100-percent ga.p still remains. In addition, the National School Boards Association has noted that while the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. of 1965 (Public Law 89-10), the ESEA Amendments of 1966 (Public Law 89-750), and the committee reports on these bills clearly enunciated the con- gressional intent that title I funds be utilized, among other purposes, for "the construction of school facilities and plans made or to he made for such programs, projects, and facilities," the official policy position of the U.S. Office of Education is that title I is not a con- struction-type of a program. For this reason, only $97 million (9.95 percent) of the estimated expenditures under this program were authorized for school construc- tion projects in fiscal year 1966. During the current fiscal year, 1967, the amount allowed for public school construction was decreased to $81 million (7.95 percent). By way of comparison, during the past year, public elementary and secondary school districts spent $3.6 billion for capital outlay purposes and complete.d some 72,600 classrooms. Nonetheless, this rate of con- struction only took care of the existing increase rate, not the backlog. Current estimates place the existing backlog need at some 350,000 new classrooms and sonie 230,000 renovated classrooms. The cost of erasing this backlog, plus maintaining the present rate of school con- struction, will approximate some $50 billion or $5 billion per year for 10 years. It is our opinion that the most pressing unmet educational need in America today is for adequate financial resources to aid in the coopera- tive financing of school construction, remodeling, and rennovation proj ects. We recommend that the estimated ESEA title I authorization for fiscal year 1968 be fully funded and that a sub~tant.ia1 l)ortion of this increase be made available for the construction, remodeling, and re- novation of public school buildings. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Ackernian, you made a very good state- ment. If there is no objection, I understand that Dr. Lund, senior vice president of Scott., Foresman & Co., American Book Publishers Council, a.nd American Textbook Publishers Institute, has t.o catch a plane at 5 :45. Is that. correct? Mr. LUND. Yes, sir. Chairman PERKINS. Would you want to come up here and briefly summarize your statement and insert it. in the reeor(l? Mr. LUND. I know they are in the same position. Chairman PERKINS. All of you are in the same position? Mr. LUND. I will join them, but. I will wait.. Mr. ACKERMAN. You have the remainder of the report.. Chairman PERKINS. Just a moment. How many other witnesses? PAGENO="0620" 1442 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMEN"I'S Mrs. RYAN. National PTA. Chairman PERKINS. ~l~ou don't have to catch a plane? Mrs. RYAN. I just lost it. Chairman PERKINS. I am sorry about that. WTho else, Dr. Ackerman, wants to make a statement in your groups? Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Calkins has a short statement that he wishes to make when I am through. Chairman PERKINS. From Cleveland? Mr. CALKINS. That is correct. Chairman PERKINS. I am anxious to hear from you. Go ahead and summarize your statement. Mr. ACKERMAN. I would merely summarize t.he last point, without reading the. total. There we were talking about the families that are residing in federally supported public housing projects in the urban centers particularly. We recommend that the eligibility requirements of this federally impacted areas program (Public Law 815 and Public Law 874) be expanded to include the children of families residing within federally sponsored public housing projects. We thank you. (The full statement follows:) STATEMENT BY DR. JOSEPH ACKERMAN, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL SCHOOL BOARDS ASSOCIATION Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: I am Dr. Joseph Ackerman, President of the National School Boards Association and a member of the Elm- hur'~t. Illinois Board of Education. I am accompanied by our Association's Executive Director. Dr. Harold V. Webb, and our Director of Federal and Con- gressional Relations. Mr. Paul N. Carlin. The National School Boards Association is a non-profit federation of the state school board associations of the fifty states, the District of Columbia. and the Virgin Islands. Our Association, through its member state school board asso- ciations represents more than 86,000 elected and appointed local school board members. These citizen leaders serve voluntarily on the governing boards of their local school districts without compensation. In many communities, this amounts to a part-time assignment with virtually full-time responsibility. The National School Boards Association is the only national organization representing local school boards and its primary objective is the strengthening of public education through active citizen participation in the policy making process of educating our children. I appreciate this opportunity Mr. Chairman, to appear before your Committee, oii behalf of the National School Boards Association to discuss the Elementary and Secondary Education Amendments of 1067. For the convenience of your Committee. my remarks will be directed toward those major policy areas which are embraced by the two identical bills (HR. 6230 by Congressman Perkins and HR. 6236 by Congressman Brademas) that are officially before your Committee for the purpose of these hearings. The annals of history will record the April 11. 1965 enactment of Public Law 89-10. the Elementary and Secondary Education Amendments of 1965. as one of the most significant educational landmarks of our generation. Webster defines landmark as "an event or development that marks a turning point." For local school boards, this "turning point" has resulted in the avail- ability of a substantially higher level of Federal incentive funds and an activated public interest in both the total needs of public education and the special require- ments of economically disadvantaged children. A direct result of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 has been a significant shift in the pattern of financing our Nation's public schools. During the current fiscal year. for example. the $28.3 billion in expenditures by our Nation's 21.684 operating public elementary and secondary school districts PAGENO="0621" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTCATIOX AMENDMENTS 1443 will come from the following sources: Federal-S.1 percent vis-a-vis 4.6 percent three years ago') ; State-37.8 percent; and local-54.1 percent. The turbulent nature of rapid change. with all of its frustrating and exciting manifestations, has never been more clearly evident than within today's local school districts. In an attempt to provide your Committee with a current `grass roots" appraisal of some of the major policy considerations implicit in the Elementary and Sec- ondary Education Amendments of 1967, the National School Boards Association has recently distributed a six-point questionnaire to its key leadership. With the Committee's permission, this analysis will be forwarded for inclusion in the hearing record as an integral part of our Association's statement. The National School Boards Association offers the following recommendations for further strengthening the purposes and objectives of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. as l)roPosed for amendnieiit by HR. 6230 and H.R. 6236: FEDERAL APPROPRIATIONS TIM ETAIILE A serious practical dilemma confronting local school districts is caused by the incompatibility of the school year with the Federal legislative calendar. For example, the Department of Health. Education, and Welfare's appropria- tions bill w-as not approved last year until October 21. 1966 and the ESEA Amendments of 1966 (P.L. 89-750). which revised the distribution formula for Title L was not enacted into law until November 3. 1966. As a result of these two factors, it was not until February 23, 1967 that the State Departments of Education were advised of their ESEA Title I maximum basic grants for fiscal year 1967. Numerous school districts still have not been apprised of their fiscal year 1967 allocations, even though less than three and a half months remain in the 1966-67 school year, The financial "pinch" came with the annual ratable adjustment provision (Sec. 208 of PL 89-10, as amended by Sec. 114 of PL 89-750), which this year reduced the national maximum amount authorized by nearly one-fourth. The $1312 billion maximum amount authorized was reduced to $1053 billion. After a further deduction for the outlying territories and state-operated programs, the amount left for local educational agencies was less than $1 billion ($989,935,591). While the Administration has recommended a five-year extension of three major education programs a year before they are scheduled to expire, it was regrettable that a recommendation was not also made at this time to extend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 beyond its June 30. 1968 expiration date. A Congressional extension of the ESEA program, during the 1967 calendar year would allow local school boards to plan ahead in an orderly manner for assimilating any modifications in its program objectives or authorization levels. Since the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (PL 89-10) is presently scheduled to expire on June 30, 1968: We recommend that P.L. 89-10 be extended, during the current calendar year, for a period of five years in order to encourage long-range local planning and and orderly implementation of any modific'ation in its program objectives or authorization levels. To ease the very real dilemma caused by the conflict between implementing most educational programs during the school year and the timing of Federal appropriations for these purposes: We recommend that Congress modify its existing appropriation procedures, insofar as it relates to the funding of programs for State and local educational purposes, so that eligible participants can be apprised during the early spring of each year. of the specific amounts that they will receive during the coming school year. STATE AND LOCAL SCHOOL BOARD PLANNING GRANTS Wl:ile local school hoards have long recognized the critical need for implement- ing systematic and comprehensive long-range planning programs, other priorities have often prevailed in the competition for severely limited educational dollars. Those forward-looking school boards which are making a real effort to implement local planning programs find themselves doubly thwarted. First, when State educational agencies are called upon for technical planning assist- ance. it is seldom available because most of their personnel specialize in PAGENO="0622" 1444 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDME~S administrative, statistical and curriculum supervision functions. ~$econd, State and Federal funds, to assist in meeting the financial costs associated with hiring or providing personnel to work on a local long-range planning project, are pres- ently available only under very limited circumstances. By way of comparison, there are more than 80 Federal planning grant programs available to other local and State governmental entities. Thoughtful school board members are also becoming increasingly apprehensive that unless local school districts implement systematic and comprehensive long-range planning programs, then this planning and evaluation "vacuum" will be filled by non-educational and/or non-local sources. The National School Boards Association feels that the proposed comprehensive educational planning amendment to Title V of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 offers a far-reaching "opportunity" for strengthening and enhancing the ability of local school districts to determine their own futures, provided that these grants are administered through the state educational agencies. We feel that such a modification would further strengthen the leadership and service role which must increasingly be assumed by the State departments. We recommend that the leadership resources of the state educational agencies be further enhanced by amending the proposed 5-year program of grants t~ State and local education agencies by providing that these Comprehensive Educational Planning and Evaluation grants be administered through the state educational agency. NATIONAL TEACHER CORPS The National School Board Association endorses the major revisions in the National Teacher Corps program, as provided for in H.R. 6230 and H.R. 6236. We are especially pleased with the amendment of the existing program to reinforce the concept of local control by further clarifying the local school board's absolute right to decide what Corps members are assigned to its schools. The reduction of the teacher-intern compensation rate to $75 per week plus S15 per dependent or the lowe-~t rate for full-time teaching in the school system, whichever is less, will remove an existing pay disparity with fully qualified teachers already in the school system by conforming the compensation rate for these teacher-interns with the prevailing rate for graduate students or the local community's salary scale. In addition, we fully support the requirement that all proposals be approved by the state educational agency, including those training programs which are to be offered by the participating institution or University. A further amendment to irovide authority for contracts with local school districts and ITniversities over a two-year period of service would allow par- ticipating school districts to more effectively plan for utilizing the services of their `trained" teacher-interns during the Corpsman's second year. We recommend that the National Teacher Corps program he further amended to provide authority for contracts with local school districts and Universities for a tw-o-year period of service. and that this pilot program be continued as modified by the provisions of HR. 6230 and HR. 6236. FFLL FFNDING OF TITLI I-SCHOOL cONSTRIJ~T'TON The estimated ESEA Title I authorization for fiscal year 1968 was $2.4 billion vis-a-vis the actual budgetary request of the Administration for only one-half ($1.2 billion) of that aiiiount. Though this budget figure estimate represents a 13 percent increase, a 100 percent gap still remains. Iii addition. the National School Boards Association has noted that while the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 19(~5 (PL 89-10), the ESEA Amendments of 1966 (PL S9-7i0). and the Committee reports on these bills clearly enunciated the Congressional intent that Title I funds be utilized, among other purposes. for `the construction of school facilities and plans made or to he iiiade for such programs. l)roiects. and facilities," the official policy poTiei~ po.~itioo of the 1~. Office of Education is that Title I is not a construction- type of a program. For this reason. only 897 million (9.95 percent) of the estimated expenditures under this program were authorized for school construction projects in fiscal year 1960. During the current fiscal year (1967),. the amount allowed for- public school construction was decreased to $81 million (7.95 percent). PAGENO="0623" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1445 By way of comparison, (luring this past year. public elementary and sec- ondary school districts spent $3.6 billion for capital outlay purposes and com- pleted some 72,600 classrooms. Nonetheless, this rate of construction only took care of the existing increase rate, not the backlog. Current estimates place the existing backlog need at some 350,000 new classrooms and some 230,000 renovated classrooms. The cost of erasing this backlog, pins maintaining the present rate of school construction, will approx- imate some $50 billion or $5 billion per year for 10 years. It is our opinion tbat the most pressing unmet educational need in America today is for adequate financial resonrces to aid in the cooperative financing school construction, remodeling, and renovation projects. We recoiiiinent that the estimated ESEA Title I authorization for fiscal year 1968 be fully funded and that substantial portion of this increase be made available for the construction, remodeling, and renovation of public school buildings. ~unnc HOUsING 5TUDENT5 Last September there were 607,000 families residing within Federally-spon- sored public housing projects. While there are no current national statistics available as to the nnmber of children from these families who are currently en- rolled in the public schools, we would estimate that the figure of one million youngsters, which was previously indicated to your Committee, is probably a conservative figure. As the Committee is well aware, local government (including school districts) derives approximately 86% of its local tax revenue froia property tax sources. Since Federally-sponsored public housing projects are exempt from local prop- erty taxes, nearly all of the local costs of educating these more than one million children are currently borne by their property-taxpaying neighboi-s. At the present tinie a partial offset is provided in the form of payments-in- lieu of taxes which are paid by the public honsing authority to the local pub- lic taxing bodies as a contribution for the full range of local governmental services w-hich are provided for these 607,000 families. This payment-in-lieu of taxes payiiient is limited by statute to 10% of the shelter rent which is paid to the public honsing authority. During fiscai year 1064 this provision resulted in $18.6 million in payments. By \vay of comparison, the cost of educating- one million children exceeds $300 million in local taxes. This tax inequity is not restricted to only the major metropolitan jurisdic- tions. 275.000 of these children reside within the 14 largest cities and the remaining 725,000 live in smaller and rural communities. We recomiminend that the eligibility requirements of the Federally Impacted Areas Program (PL 815 and Pb 874) be expanded to include the children of families residing within Federally-sponsored public housing projects. I appreciate this opportunity to present these views on behalf of the National School Boards Association. Thank you. Chairman PERKINs. Go ahead. Mr. CALKIN5. My name is hugh Calk ins. I am a member of the Cleveland Board of Education and a member of Dr. Ackerman's committee. I would like to confine my testimony to the problem of Federal funding of programs for disadvantaged children with particular reference to the political problems of most of the big cities of this country. Chairman PERKINS. With that idea in mind, do you feel that the categorical approach that we now have under title I or a general Federal aid approach will better serve these disadvantaged areas at this time? Mr. CALKINS. In the immediate future with the limitations which exist on the Federal budget I am very sure that tile categorical ap- proach is essential if we are going to improve the quality of education in the inner-city. PAGENO="0624" 1446 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMEWI'S Chairman PERKINS. And you are making that statement from your experience upon the Cleveland public school board? Mr. CALKINs. I am, sir, and what I would like to do is to explain to you why I believe this is so. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Mr. CALKINS. It is essentially a political reason. I must start with the financial problem of the Cleveland schools. We are now spend- ing approximately $530 per pupil per year for all purposes; operating purposes, building purposes. This includes all of our Federal pro- grams for inner-city children as well as the programs which we conduct for the 154,000 children who go to our schools. That figure is about 80 percent of the average expenditure for educa- tion in suburban Cleveland. That means taking into account all of the extra Federal help which we are now receiving. We are still only spending on the average 80 percent of what the districts that surround Cleveland are spending. Now it is no wonder that there is a steady migration out of Cleveland of middle-class families, both white and Negro, to the suburbs. It is a fact that the tax rate in Cleveland, the total tax rate for all purposes, is among the highest in the county in w-hich we live. There are a few suburban districts with a higher total rate, but most of the suburban districts have a substantially lower total tax rate than we in Cleveland do. Nevertheless, they can provide education which on the average is 20 percent more costly and probably in many respects therefore better than we are able to provide in the city of Cleveland. The reason for this is that the costs of municipal government in the city of Cleveland are much heavier than they are in suburbia. In Ohio as a whole approximately 66 percent of all local taxes go for schools, but in the big cities of Ohio less than 50 percent of the taxes go for schools. There are many figures available to show that the cost of police protection, fire protection, and all the other gvernment serv- ices associated with big cities are much heavier than in areas of smaller population. This results in the basic fiscal problem of big cities, which is that, although our t.ax effort is high. our tax yield for education is low. Now the second important fact is that we are dependent entirely upon the voters for our money. This is a characteristic of most major cities in this country, not all. It is an important reason why New York City has quite different problems than many of the other major cities do, because New York is what is known as a fiscally dependent school district; the schools get their money from the regular city bud- get, but in Cleveland and in Pittsburgh, and in Chicago, and in most of the major cities of the country school money is voted every few years by the voters. I am happy to say that in Cleveland t.he voters are supporting educa- tion. Last fall we asked the voters to approve a 120-percent increase, more than doubling the size of the bonded indebtedness of the Cleve- land school district, and they approved it by a 2-to-i majority. At the same election we asked them to increase by 20 percent the taxes for the operating expenditures of the Cleveland schools, and they approved that by the same 2-to-i majority. PAGENO="0625" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS 1447 Now the voters of Cleveland have an important characteristic of which we must be aware. About 65 percent of the voters of Cleveland are white, about 35 percent of the voters of Cleveland are. Negro. This is a markedily different ratio than the ratio of the children in the Cleveland school system. About 53 percent of the children in the Cleveland school system are Negro and about 47 percent are white. Similar figures are applicable in all of the major cities of the United States. A majority of the voters are white and a. majority, or a grow- ing number which soon will be a majority, of the children in the public school system, which depend upon voter approval for its money are Negro. As you are all aware, there were serious riots in Cleveland last sum- mer. These riots preceded the election at which we were, as success- ful as we were, by not more than `2 or 3 months. There are likely to be riots in Cleveland again this summer, perhaps next summer. The Cleveland Board of Education is therefore in the position of going to the voters for the additional money we need in a context in which most of the money is spent for the Negro children, some of whose fam- ilies and some of the people in whose neighborhoods are the people who are causing the disturbances in t.he streets, and I emphasize the word "some," because of course most of the Negro families in the City of Cleveland are law-abiding citizens w-ho are the ones most hurt by rioting and disorder in the streets. Now in this cont.ext. I put to the committee the question: How should compensatory education be financed in the big cities of the United States? Is it reasonable to suppose that a school district, such as the Cleveland school district, which needs to increase its operating ex- penditures by 20 percent just. to get up to the average in suburban Cleveland can also persuade the voters to provide the money that is required for compensatory education? Can we persuade a voting group, a majority of whom are white: are concerned about the growth of the ghetto; are people who came to this country and made their own way the hard way up the economic ladder before the Federal Government thought it was a part of its business to help people up the economic. ladder-can we expect such people to provide substantial amounts of money for compensatory education for the children of Negro families, many of whom have moved t.o Cleveland recently from the South, some of whom are caus- ing the disorders in the streets? I think the answer to that question is apparent in the voting results. In Cleveland one of the reasons we are successful in persuading the voters t.o support the schools is because we take. the position that it is our responsibility in Cleveland to provide quality education for every child and we do not say to the voters, WTe want you to provide a lot of extra money which we are going to spend in Central and in Glenville and t.he other troubled parts of Cleveland. Iii fact, we do spend some extra money there because in providing quality education for every child we recognize that there are greater educational needs in the inner city and we provide them, but. our basic theme is; we are provid- ing basic quality educatioll for every child and that is what we want the citizens of Cleveland to support and that is what they do support by a 2-to-i vote. 754~)267~I)t 2-40 PAGENO="0626" 1448 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS By contrast, I call to your attention the experience of CinciimatL Cincinnati has a board of education which has been more courageous than we have had in Cleveland and has put t.he question: Shall there be compensatory education, shall the voters of Cincinnati provide extra money to spend on the inner city child? Cincinnati did provide that money, but as a result, in the November election this fall and in a followup election held in December, the voters of Cincinnati rejected a 4-mill operating levy in the Cincinnati School District by the same 2-to-i majority that the voters in Cleve- land were approving the 4-mill operating levy which we presented to the voters. I suggest there is a lesson to he drawn from this experience, a rather sad experience, if you will, hut a true one. The fact of the matter is that about. all you can expect the big city school districts in this country to do hy local effort is to try to catch up to the suburbs, to try to provide the same quality of education for every child as is avail- able in the suburbs. They can do a little more, they can provide some money for the extra costs of educating the inner city children, but if we are serious in the Fnited States about providing equal educational opportunity for alL which means providing more expensive education for inner city children than we do for the average child, the extra costs must come, most of them, from either the Sta.te or the Federal Gov- ernment-now the State government. There are several States in this c.ountry I am glad to say which do provide some money for the extra costs of disadvantaged children. Connecticut is one. Pennsylvania is another. The Governor of Ohio is interested in the big city problems and I am hopeful that Ohio will join the list this year. The most we expect to get from Ohio is some amount which will average out to ~50 or $75 or perhaps $100 for each of the 70.000 disadvantaged children that. we have in Cleveland. It costs ~000 to run a IIea.dst art program the way we do it, it costs $1,200 to do it the way private organizations do it. The amount of money that. we will get. from the Sta.te, while it will be helpful. will not do more than add a little bit to what we already have. We are now getting about $70 from the Federa.l Government for each disadvantaged child. The amounts tha.t. we need and the amounts that we can profitably use are very much larger. In 1966 the Cleveland Board of Education spent wisely and well every dime of the approximately $6 million which we got for the edu- cation of disadvantaged children through tit.le I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Xct and through the Economic Opportunity Act. In the current fiscal year we don't. know exactly how much money we are going to get. as yet. It will not he more than we received in 1966, it may be le.ss. It. results in a smaller rate of expenditure this year than we had last year for these programs because in 1966 we received the money rather late in the year and therefore we spend it at a monthly rate which is more rapid than we are spending this yea.r. Therefore, the fact. is that in Cleveland we. are now conducting com- pensatory education programs at a. lower scale then we were a yea.r ago. In 196S if the budget proposal which is before the. Congress is ap- proved and if the Perkins-Quie amendment becomes effective, the result PAGENO="0627" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1449 will be that we will have to spend in Cleveland in 1!)68 substantially less money, substantially less money than we have this year or last. year. The reason is that if you take the same amount. of money allocated to the State of Ohio and then redistribute it among the school districts of the State, in accordance wit.h the Perkins-Qiiie forn'iula, it will end up in more money going to the rural areas in which there are a lot of children whose family incomes are less than $3,000 and less money coming to the big cities where there is the concentration of children who are on ADC. I think the Perkins-Quie formula is a good formula, please do not misunderstand me, but. only in the context of a higher appropriation. In the context of a constant appropriation, it is a decision that the level of compensatory education in the inner city will be reduced. Now, there a.re a number who are pessimistic about the effectiveness of compensatory education. There are those who read the Coleman report published by HEW this year as indicating tha.t compensatory education does not work. I urge the committee not to accept that view of the Coleman report., it is not, incidentally, as I understand it, the author's view of the Coleman report. All the Coleman report shows is that to date we do not have a quality of education in the inner city that. produces statistically meas- urable results, but. I have seen schools in the inner city in Cleveland which I believe are better titan the average school in suburban Cleveland. I am persuaded, and I have no statistic to back it up, but I am per- suaded by observation of what. we are doing in Cleveland schools t.hat the additional funds which we spend on remedia.l reading, that we spend on additional visual aids in the city, that we will spend on keeping the schools open in the. afternoon and evenings, that we spend on interracial camping experiences, that we. spend on a whole range of programs, are making a real difference for the quality of education of the children in the inner city. It is very easy for us t.o become. discouraged about. the effectiveness of the poverty program, about the effectiveness of title I. These pro- grams are only a. year or two old. I think it is extraordinary how much they have accomplished how soon. I urge the. committee. if it. can possibly do so within the limitations imposed by t.he Vietnam war and by t.he pressures of the budget to try to provide a steady increase year after year of Federal funds to im- prove the quality of education in the inner city. This is not. an int.erference in local affairs, this is simply a recogni- tion that. the. problem of lack of education and the problem of poverty in the Tnited States is a national concern. `We are now engaged in the reconstruction period from the Civil War. most. of the families who come to Cleveland. Most of the families who come t.o Cleveland, and incidentally some of our less-educated families and those who most qualify for and get t.he additional Federal help are not. Negro, they are the white families from Kentucky and Tennessee, it is the generations of inadequate education that these children and their families and their grandparents have received that. cre.ate the problems for t.he inner cit.y. PAGENO="0628" 1450 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS It is not fair to expect the people of Cleveland to provide the extra money to deal with the problem, it must come from the Federal Government. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Any further statements from any of von gent leme.n? Mr. ACKERMAN. No. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead, Mr. Lund. STATEMENT OF KENNETH W. LUND, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, SCOTT, FORESMAN & CO., AMERICAN BOOK PUBLISHERS COUN- CIL, AND AMERICAN TEXTBOOK PUBLISHERS INSTITUTE Mr. LUND. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That is a most eloquent statement to follow. My name is Kenneth W. Lund, senior vice president of Scott, Foresman & Co., book publishers, of Glenview, Ill. I am appearing today on behalf of the American Textbook Publishers Institute and the American Book Publishers Council, the two major professional associations of book publishers, the members of which produce more than 95 percent of the books of all kinds published in the United States. I have with me Mr. Robert W. Frase, director of the joint Washing- ton office of the institute and the council. I want to extend our thanks on behalf of our organization for a chance to make a brief statement. I will file a statement with the reporter hieie and this may expedite matters a bit. I of course want to add a wholehearted endorsement to the spirit, the nature and the intent and implementation of the ESEA bill in the past and the extension prospects in the future. The cause is urgent, as has been eloquently said, and we merely add our voice to those of others in this respect. In that process you and we both are hunting for the most effective use of the money, and to that extent we add our voice to the hope that~ you will give serious consideration to the many pleas for the extension of time. Planning the acquisition of people, the allocation of facilities, all take time and the extensiom as has been mentioned, for 4 or 5 years seems more than wise, urgent really, in connection with this type of act. We have two special comments we wish to make in connection with the bill. The first one is an endorsement of the general idea of entering into services with the private sector as well as the public sector for educa- tional research. We think there is a broad range of talent both in- terested and capable of contributing to the urgent cause at hand, and we urge that you lend your endorsement and see ultimately that~ this becomes part of the act. The second comment has to do with a special part and in that it has not been referred to today during my hearing, I would like to read that part of the statement. I come now to a provision of the bill which frankly disturbs us- this is the language on page 38, lines 15 through 19, which read as follows: PAGENO="0629" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTCATION AMENDMENT~S 1451 * * producing and distributing educational media for the use of handi- capped persons, their parents, their actual or potential employers, and other per- sons directly involved in work for the advancement of the handicapped * * *" Commissioner Howe, in his prepared statement of March 2 on the bill, explained and justified this provision in the following way: The U.S. Office of Education may now SUI)port research regarding educational media. This is generally restricted to research concerning the effectiveness of existing media. With the exception of the specific authority under the Captioned Films for the Deaf program there is no authorization to enter into contracts for the development of new media. There is no authorization which would permit specialized training programs to train specialists in the use of such media nor is there any authorization which would permit involvement in the production of such materials or media except for that under the Captioned Films program. Although the Office of Education has no particular interest in the production and distribution of educational materials there are some instances where this can be important. For example, there is some value in the support of sheltered workshops for adolescent-aged retarded or otherwise handicapped youngsters. Such support would indirectly or directly require support for pro- duction of materials produced in the workshops. The support for the development of instructional media is particularly im- portant at this time. Development costs run high, yet the future of education for the handicapped may well depend upon the availability of media not yet off the drawing boards. Although the granting of authority to the F.S. Office of Education to get into the business of producing and distributing educational materials is limited in this provision of the bill to the production of such materials for the handicapped, their parents. their employers and other persons involved, this authority strikes us as being unwise in itself and a~ bad precedent. Unlike the situation in some other countries. the U.S. Federal Government has not. been responsible for the production and distribution of educational materials. This has been left to private enterprise and to some extent to nonprofit organi- zations and the result has been, I believe, better and more abundant educational materials than exist in any other country. As you well know, there have been mans- examples. This is a Benjamin Franklin done in large type by a man, Keith Jennison, who has really mobilized the private sector to accomplish this kind of thing. We do not think we are far apart in this respect, and we believe that there can be working appropriately prepared to enlist in this instance the resources of the private sector. May I just add one word in closing. I spent some 10 years of my life working in the. Chicago public schools concerned with the pro- grams for the handicapped. No comment here should interpret, any less concern than most of you have for effective programs in this field. WTe are just~ anxious that you use the full resources of the education community, including the private sector in this respect. and we would 1)0th endorse, support, and try to find ways of im~)lementing aiid (his- seminating this kind of research. It is only the question of entering directly into the publislung business. Chairman PERKINS. Let me ask you one question. You people in the National School Boards Association and other witnesses all endorse the National Teachers Corps. the national recruiting and Office of Education? Mr. LUND. That is a quest.ion for you. PAGENO="0630" 1452 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. ACKERMAN. WelT, the comment we made in the statement was that we endorse the program as it is amended. We think it is one way. We think that it has created an environment, we don't think it is the only way, and we would like to see it kept on the pilot program. Chairman PERKINS. How is it working in the city of Cleveland? Mr. CALKINS. It is working very well. We have a small program with about 25 Corps members being trained at the University of kkron. Chairman PERKINS. Twenty-five Corps members, teachers, besides your interns? Mr. CALKINS. Twenty-five interns and only two or three teachers. It is very small, but it is working very well and we are pleased with it. Chairman PERKINS. Can you evaluate the effectiveness thus far? Mr. CALKINS. Yes, second-best program for recruiting inner-city teachers mto inner-city schools. Chairman PERKINS. Any other comments on it? Mr. LUND. The plan I think is wonderful. I do not have the direct experience. Chairman PERKINS. What about yourself? Do you favor the inner city? Mr. WEBB. We feel it is one of the ways in which people can be attracted into teaching in the inner city in the problem areas where otherwise we might not be able to assign them for a variety of reasons. The business of bringing people who volunteer or present themselves for special training in this area-then we have some evidence. Chairman PEru~INs. Briefly tell us why you are able to recruit teach- ers from the National Teachers Corps when you are not otherwise able to recruit teachers for these disadvantaged areas. Some of the mem- bers of the House would like to have a concrete statement from the school board representatives. Mr. WEBB. This would be my opinion, and I also would like to give Mr. Calkins a chance to expound on this, too, from the viewpoint of Cleveland. I think there are a couple of factors. One is that the nature of the Corps itself is such that there is a charisma, a sense of mission, that can be generated with this kind of a program. When people are recruited into the program. given special skill and knowledge as to how best to teach in this area, then they have a sense of security and success that enables them to stay with that kind of teaching. The second part that I was going to make is that it recruits from people who have not originally planned to go into teaching and entered it through another route. Chairman PERKINs. Go ahead. Mr. CALKINS. The quality of courses in education given at many American colleges is so had that many of the ablest students going to college do not take them. Instead, they take history, government, eco- nomics, mathematics, science, and a variety of other things that they think are better taught~ have more content and will do them more good in whatever occupation they wish to enter. If they then decide to be teachers, they are confronted with certification requirements which say they cannot teach and t.hey are confronted with adminis- PAGENO="0631" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1453 trators in school systems who essentially say, "We don't care how good a teacher you will be, you have got to have had the certification requirements before we will let you into the classroom." What they need is some kind of a transition program that gets them into the classroom with courses of sufficient quality that they don't feel repelled by the course that they have to take. The Teacher Corps is one of the devices that will do that. Another device that does it is the master in arts in teaching program. When I said the Teacher Corps was our second best program, what I meant was that our best was a master of arts in teaching program, but they are both good programs, and they are both good for essentially the same reason. They are a high quality, attractive means by which the able college graduate who does not have his certification behind him can get into the classroom and get his certification requirements and become a teacher. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much. Mr. LUND. Thank you. (Mr. Lund's full statement follows:) STATEMENT BY KENNETH W. LUND ON BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN TEXTBOOK PUBLISHERS INSTITUTE AND THE AMERICAN BOOK PUBLISHERS COUNCIL My name is Kenneth W. Lund. Senior Vice President of Scott, Foresman & Company, book publishers, of Glenview, Illinois. I am appearing today on behalf of the American Textbook Publishers Institute and the American Book Publishers Council. the two major professional associations of 1)00k publishers, the members of which produce more than 95% of the books of all kinds published in the United States. I have with me Mr. Robert W. Frase. Director of the Joint Washington Office of the Institute and the Council. The 125 niembers of the American Textbook Publishers are publishers of elementary, secondary and college textbooks, subscription reference books such as encyclopedias, educational tests and maps. The 192 members of the American Book Publishers Council publish all other types of books such as adult general (or trade) books, juvenile books, scientific, medical and professional books, religious books, university press 1)OokS, book club books and paperback hooks of all desr~ptions. Many of the major publishers are, of course, members of both associations. My own firm is primarily a publisher of elementary, secondary and college textbooks, but more recently we have also gotten into the field of children's books and adult general books. We are delighted to have this opportunity of expressing our views on the bill before you and hope these comments may he of help to your Committee in amending and revising the measure when you get into executive session. Our remarks divide themselves into six specific topics, but before getting into this detail let me say that we support the bill as a whole and its general purpose of amending and extending existing legislation "by extemicling authority for allocation of funds to he used for education of Indian childi'en and children in overseas dependent schools of the Department of 1)efense. by extending and amending the National Teacher Corps program, by providing assistance for comprehensive educational planning, and by improving programs of education for the handicapped; to improve programs of vocational education; to improve authority for assistance to schools in federally impacted areas and areas suffering a major disaster," TIMELY EXTENSION OF EXISTING LEGISLATION We were very glad to see in President Johnson's health and education message of February 28 the emphasis on a better educational timetable. This has two aspects-early renewal of appropriation authorizations for education and library programs, and early action on the annual appropriation bills for these programs. The bill before you provides for some extensions of elementary, secondary and vocational programs, but we were rather disappointed to find that some of the PAGENO="0632" 1454 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS major prgIaIiIs for elenientary and secondary education-namely, Titles I, II a 11(1 III f the Elenienta ry and Secondary Education Act of 1963 which now eX~O1e ii miii- ~i(l. lti(5. are not prop(m(l to 1IC extended this year. We have had a lid deal f experience as publishers with these ESEA titles because `.ulc~ta 111 ia I i1uaiitities it looks and ii her instructional materials have been purcllased with these funds. We know from experience that there is a great deal if wa sb and iiietheieiicy involved when these Federal funds (10 not become available until ~vell into the academic year which starts in September, rather thaii when the normal educational planning. budgeting and ordering of supplies ~5 (lone in the spring. We would be concerned, therefore, that if extensions of Titles I. II and III of ESEA are postponed for Congressional consideration to 1968. the authorizations, and subsequently the appropriations which must be based on them, would delay the availability of funds well beyond July 1, as was the case in 1966. We would hope. therefore. that your Committee would seriously consider the desirability of extending the authorizations of the ESEA titles in the bill before you in 1967 rather than waiting until 1968. EARLY ACTION ON APPROPRIATION BILLS The President's education message contained the following statement: I iV'f/C that the Con gr'.~s enact CdUC(ltiOfl appropriation8 early enough to allow the i\ution.~ ~.cliool.~ and college.'i to plan cffectu'cly. I have directed the Secretary of Health. Education. and Welfare to work with the Congress toward this end." This problem has become a matter of increasing concern to everyone involved with education in the United States, including members of this Committee as was brought out in the hearings last fall conducted by Mrs. Green on the opera- tion of Office of Education programs. Ten if not scores of bills have been introduced in the House of Representatives this year urging that the appropria- tion bills for education programs be passed by May 1 of each year in order to provide for orderly education planning and budgeting. We would not presume to advise your Committee or the Congress as to how this problem can be met as a matter of technical legislative procedure. We only want to add our voice to the recommendation that it be solved in some way. There is problably no other single legislative action which could he taken that would so much increase the efficiency of the educattion and library legislation now on the statute books. STATISTICAL ON EDPCATIONAL MATERIALS It would be helpful to the book publishing industry-and in turn the separate industry which actually manufacturers our books. the printers and binders- to have reasonably good statistics from the U.S. Office of Education on what kinds of published materials. and in what quantities. are being purchased under the major Federal education and library programs. With a good historical base on what has happened. it would then be possible for the U.S. Office to project these figures into the future as part of the five year forecasts which are to form an integral part of the new Programmed Budgeting System. Book pur- chases under the new Federal education and library programs of the last few years are not a large factor in total book sales-possibly on the order of 5% of the total in 1966: but they may be quite significant for certain specific types of hooks and could in the short run result in a squeeze on stocks and manufactur- ing capacity if there should not be sufficient time for advance planning. The Book Manufacturers' Institute, which is made up of the specialized printers and hinders of books. passed the following resolution at their annual meeting last November. which was forwarded to Secretary Gardner and Commissioner H iwi~ l1e~olved : That the U.S. Department of Health. Education, and Welfare and the U.S. i)Iliee of Education lie urged to provide continuing information on the use of beoks and other printed materials under the Federal ec1ucation and library proni'ams. including past expenditures and estimates of future expenditures, which ~viil enable publishers and manufacturers of printed educational mate- rials and their materials suppliers to idan hetter for adequate production and (list rihiution of the required educational materials AND, be it further resolved: That the Book Manufacturers' Institute stand ready to confer jointly with representatives of the publishers' associations and the Department of Health. Education, and Welfare to develop the details of the PAGENO="0633" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1455 information required for appropriate private industry planning in order that the most effective implementation of Federal educattion programs may be assured." We have had some subsequent discussions on this matter with officials at the U.S. Office and we hope to be able to work out with them a statistical program which will be beneficial to both the educational institutions which are consumers of our product and to the producers and suppliers of these materials in the private sector of the economy. DELAYED PAYMENTS UNDER FEDERAL PROGRAMS We should like to mention a problem which has arisen, not so much for publishers but for specialized book wholesalers who supply schools and libraries, of the great delay in many cases in payment for materials, particulalry school library books, purchased under Federal programs. This situation is putting a considerable financial strain on the smaller book wholesalers and if it continues would impair their ability to perform efficiently their important function in the distribution chain of getting books from the l)Ublishers to these institutional consumers. Part of the problem is the lack of administrative personnel available in local school districts to handle the details of the numerous new federally funded programs and some relief can be expected as additional administrative funds are made available either from Federal or local sources. The problem arises in other cases because of the inexperience of some school districts in ordering books for school libraries where no such libraries have heretofore existed. We have been working with the professional association of school business officials to suggest ways in which ordering and payment procedures can be simplified and streamlined. We mention the problem here because it niay be of interest to the Committee and also because through the printed record of these hearings, or some mention in the Committee report on the bill, the nature and seriousness of the problem can be brought to the attention of the educational community. AUTHORIZATION OF' CONTRACTS WITH PRIVATE PROFIT-MAKING ORGANIZATIONS There are several provisions in the bill which would authorize contracts with private profit-making agencies as opposed to the present general limitation on the Office of Education to letting these contracts only to nonprofit agencies. One of these provisions is on page 30 of the bill, lines 15 and 1(3. which would permit the Commissioner to make contracts with "public and private agencies, institutions or organizations" for special projects in the field of coniprehensive educational planning, especially on an interstate basis. Another is on page 34 of the bill, lines 22 and 23, which would permit the Commissioner to contract with "public or private agencies or institutions" for projects in the fields of re- cruiting personnel for service to the handicapped and to iuml)rove the dissemina- tion of information on educational opportunities for the handicapped. We believe that these are important steps in the right direction and should be ex- tended to all the grant and contract programs of the U.S. ()ffice. This would liii- prove the quality of educational research and dissemination by making available the skill and experience of private enterprise, including the publishing industry, as well as nonprofit institutions. AUTHORIZATION FOR THE PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION OF EDUCATIONAL MEDIA I come now to a provision of the bill which frankly disturbs us-this is the language on page 38. lines 15 through 19, which reads as follows: "(2) producing and distributing educational media for the use of handicapped persons, their parents, their actual or potential employers, and other persons directly involved in w-ork for the advancement of the handicapped". Commissioner Howe, in his prepared statement of March 2 on the bill, explained and justified this provision in the following way "The 1'. 8. ( )flice fo Educa tioii may now support research r('ga rdimig educational media. This is generally resti'Ltemj to re~eari'1i convernimmg the effectiveness of existing mmmcdiii. With the exception of the specie authority immnler the Captioned Films for the 1)eaf program there is mm ammthorizatiomi to enter into contracts for the development of new media. There is no authorization which would permit specialized training programs to train specialists iii the use of such media noi' is there any authorization which would permit iiivolvenieiit iii the pm'oduction of PAGENO="0634" 1456 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS such materials or media except for that under the Captioned Films programs. Although the Office of Education has no particular interest in the production and distribution of educational materials there are some Instances where this cant be important. For example, there is some value in the support of sheltered workshops for adolescent-aged retarded or otherwise handicapped youngsters. Such support would indirectly or directly require support for production of mate- rials produced in the workshops. "The support for the development of instructional media is particularly im- portant at this time. Development costs run high, yet the future of education for the handicapped may well depend upon the availability of media not yet off the drawing boards." Although the granting of authority to the U.S. Office of Education to get into the business of producing and distributing educational materials is limited to this provision of the bill to the production of such materials for the handicapped, their parents, their employers and other persons involved, this authority strikes us as being unwise in itself and a bad precedent. Unlike the situation in some other countries, the U.S. Federal Government has not been responsible for the production and distribution of educational materials. This has been left to private enterprise and to some extent to nonprofit organizations and the results has been, I believe, better and more abundant educational materials than exist in any other country. An example of what private enterprise can do-and is doing-in the specific field of materials for the visually and otherwise handicapped is the production of large type books. An enterprising and public-spirited man who has spent his entire professional lifet in the hook publishing business. Mr. Keith Jennison, some four years ago saw the need for production of hooks in large type for the visually handicapped and also persons handicapped in other ways. such as physically and hraindamaged. He established a firm to produce such books and has by this time published 100 titles. In 1966 100,000 copies of these books were sold. Just recently Mr. Jennison signed a contract to produce textbooks in large type for the State of California. Although originally designed to serve the visually handicapped. large type books have proven valuable for persons handi- capped in a variety of other ways. We were not aware of this provision of the bill before it was introduced and discussed by Commissioner Howe in his statement on the opening day of your hearings, March 2. We hope that it will be possible to work out amending langu- age which will meet any legitimate need for the encouragement of the production of instructional materials for the handicapped without getting the Federal Governiaent into the publishing business. In closing, let me repeat our general support of the bill and to express again our gratitude to the Committee for this opportunity to present the views of the book publishing industry. Chairman PERKINS. Mrs. Ryan, do you want to come around now and make your statement. Mr. WEBB. Mr. Chairman, may we ask permission that Mr. Acker- man's complete statement be included in the record. Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Without objection. the statement will be inserted in the record and all other statements that you want to insert in the record. Now' do we have another witness in the room other than Mrs. Edward T. Ryan? We regret that you missed that plane, Mrs. Ryan. It is just one of those things on a busy day. I am sure that one of them will have an extra place. STATEMENT OF MRS. EDWARD F. RYAN, CHAIRMAN FOR LEGIS- LATION, NATIONAL CONGRESS OF PARENTS ANI) TEACHERS Mrs. RYAN. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee: We ap- preciat.e very much this opportunity. at any time in the day, to offer our views in respect to these amendments to the Elementary and Sec- PAGENO="0635" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1457 ondary Education Act. I am Mrs. Edward F. Ryan, of Manchester, Mass., chairman for legislation of the National Congress of Parents and Teachers, whose membership is approximately 11,~5O,OOO parents and teachers. WTe wish to express our enthusiastic support of several proposals of this bill. We in national PTA regard the disparities in our educa- tional system as one of our major and most demanding problems, and particularly the very inadequate education of millions of children in inner cities and other depressed areas. We have seen that it is hard to get a "handle" on improving the education of these children, partly because of inadequate finances, partly because of their own inadequate backgrounds. In all too many classrooms teachers and students have a hard time finding common ground for learning, even to suffering from deep mutual distrust. Yet~ it is of the utmost importance that these children be educated, for as this committee has shown there is no other road to breaking the poverty cycle for millions of children now growing up under great disadvantages. It is our observation that~ the National Teacher Corps is a unique instrument for developing the kind of opportunities these children need, because the teaching preparation for these internes is developed specifically for teaching disadvantaged children, with teaching assign- ments closely related to their academic programs, and continuous con- tact between the training institution and the supervising school staff. We are advised by leaders in the profession that these programs are filling a need not hitherto met, are truly innovative. The NEA's Na- tional Commission on Teacher Education and Professional Standards is using 14 Teacher Corps programs as demonstration centers in vari- ous parts of the country. There is an additional advantage to our schools, as iDr. Webb just mentioned, in that the Corps members are selected from those who have not previously prepared for teaching, and are therefore a needed addition to the number of highly qualified teachers. We in PTA are particularly pleased with the emphasis in the Na- tional Teacher Corps program upon the student teachers' working with the parents and communities of their children. In Lowell, Mass., for instance, where the teams are working in part with non-English- speaking children, the program director points out that by going into their homes the Corps members learn to understand the background of the students and at the same time can alleviate the fears prevalent among the parents, thus helping to break down the polarity between home and school which is a major problem in disadvantaged areas. The Corps members are also working with children individually and, through the new techniques they are learning, carry over the in- dividualizing programs into the classroom. This is one of the most important parts of the whole program. Of course they also do remedial work and carry on dramatic and other activities which the teachers have not had time to do. But the chief reason among many why the Lowell school administration is grateful and enthusiastic for its Teacher Corps group comes from its hope to use them next year for in-service training for the regular teaching staff. In a series of month-long programs with corpsmen for 10 teachers at a time, the administration hopes to enable the teachers to-and I PAGENO="0636" 1458 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS quote the words of the assistant superintendent-"learn to carry out in practice what they have heard about in theory." Thus the Corps becomes not merely remedial in service but an agent of improvement for the school system. This has been a year of "working out wrinkles," I was told, and that it would be "a shame if they could not continue with their wonderful plans for next year." Many of our people have visited these programs around the country, and are enthusiastic with what they have heard and seen. We would say that we approve of the cooperative arrangements under which the Teacher Corps is working: the training program worked out between the local school system and the nearby university, approval of the pro- gram by the State department, and school administration approval of the Corps members. `We note the recommendation of stipend on a graduate-student level and would hope that, like the student stipend, this payment would be tax-exempt; if not, that the amount would be adjusted accordingly. WTe hope very much that this unique and im- mensely valuable program will be extended and expanded, we would hope on the two-year contract level, with the full authorization requested. PTA members have long been concerned for the sadly inadequate educational facilities for Indian children in many places. According to the New York Times of April 16, 1966, 8,000 Indian children be- tween 8 and 16 were not in school at all for lack of facilities. Ob- viously the task of providing for these children is great and requires more than these measures. Nevertheless, school libraries are the core of any school, however poorly housed, and we earnestly support. this assistance. the extension of title II to schools for Indian children and overseas de.pendents schools. In the overseas dependents schools, libraries are generally more or less adequate in size. but have suffered in quality from the stringency of the limitation upon expenditures. As a National PTA represent- ative, I have, visited large schools whose librarians have been con- cerned by the paucity of books in certain important areas, such as science or literature. More than one school makes a practice of refer- ring students to the adult base libraries; one high school near London sent its students to English libraries for some needs-a more useful pract ice for intercultural understanding than for everyday classwork. Most schools are too isolated for such assistance, and the adult li- braries are often poorly balanced in nontechnical areas. Thus the schools need other sources of help, which is very often the PTA. In one school I arrived as the librarian was unpacking $800 worth of hooks for younger children purchased by the PTA-and very grateful she. was. `We feel, however, that if the PTA expends its energies in this manner, it may well slight such more important work as parent education, human relations, and closer cooperation between teachers and parents-all basic to the welfare of both children and schools. We warmly support the extension of title II in both these areas. Extension of title III to Schools for Indian children and overseas dependents schools: In both these areas there are more programs and greater needs than there are funds to meet, under title III. In respect to Indian children we would suggest that exploration is very important to assure the kind PAGENO="0637" ELEMENTARy AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1459 of education that will meet the special needs of these children to be- come self-supporting and self-respecting in the land of which they are citizens, without losing their own cultural heritage. In respect to the overseas dependents schools we should like to describe a program which we regard as of very great importance, for which there are no present funds but for which funds from this title III seem most appropriate. National PTA sends representatives every year to its overseas branch, the European Congress of American Parents and Teachers, who are given opportunities to visit the. schools and military commu- nities. Twice I have had this privilege, visiting schools in Germany, Oslo, and London in October 1964, and several locations in Turkey in November 1966. One of our concerns has been for the small as- sistance available for children with mental health problems, a concern which is amply shared by the Director of the European area schools and many school personnel. Psychiatrists and others who have studied the problem concur that~ 10 percent is a conservative estimate for those children who have various mental health problems, and this means, with about 100,000 in that area, we are talking about 10,000 in the European area. This is the same PI~oPortion as would occur in any American community, with the difference that in the overseas military communities there are almost no resources for help. As I am sure the committee is aware, a multiplicity of factors are involved, including family pressures brought about by military ex- igencies or inability to live satisfactorily in a strange country. If the problem is severe, enough, and causes a sufficient disturbance in the military community, the family is sent home-with the consequences to military career and family relations which you may imagine. If not, in most places child, family, and classroom get along as best they can for the balance Df the duty tour, during which time small problems can easily become serious. The. critical need is not so much for clinical services, for these are quickly overwhelmed, but for professional assistance to teachers in un- derstanding how to help their problem children, as well as t,o cope with their own sometimes considerable difficulties, to parents in under- standing their children and the building of family relationships, to children in understanding themselves and in building confidence. These services, so common in the~ States, scarcely exist overseas. Small cooperative projects are under way in several locations be- tween school people and the few military psychiatrists who happen to have had experience with children or training with children. We would bring to your attention, however, a most P1'omising project in Turkey, developed by the chief of psychiatric services of TUSLOG and the assistant superintendent for pupil personnel services for the school district. With the help of the chief of pediatrics in Ankara, a careful survey was made to determine the number of children needing psychiatric assistance, which also showed the. inadequacy of available personnel to provide the needed services. Small special classes were established for emotionally disturbed and brain-damaged children, with a combin- ation of professional and volunteer personnel. The collaborators then turned to what is commonly know-n as the ~`co1mnlmfljty mental health PAGENO="0638" 1460 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY ED[CATION AMENDMENTS approach, involving the hospital commander and other medical per- sonnel, guidance. counselors, school administrators, chaplains, PTA and other community leaders, and also the Ambassador, TTJSLOG commander, FSIS, AID, and two Turkish physicians. Later the collaborators visited other locations in Turkey to develop the same co- operation between medical and school people, supported by the same community approach. I mi~ht interpolate I happened to be in Adana on the occasion and shared in one of these meetings. To carry out the. plan, however, certain professional personnel are essential, who are not now available, nor can be available within exist- ing funds. It is proposed specifically that there be in Ankara., under the loint guidance of the Chief of Psychiatric Services and the As- sist ant Superintendent for Pupil Personnel Services, a team consisting of ps'vchiatrist, psychologist, and social worker, to serve the Ankara schools and community, and also three other teams of social worker and psychologist in three other locations, working under the Ankara group. The latter three teams would serve all other present locations in the Middle East, and all would be school-oriented, trained with children and families. The plan is enthusiastically supported by all who have been involved, by the Ambassador, by the military commander in Turkey, and by the area direc.tor of the dependents schools. The problem is one of funds. We would hope that. title III funds could be used to develop this im- portant, innovative program, which would serve not only to assist the children and families of our military installations in Turkey, hut also as an exemplary program to train personnel for our other mill- tarv areas. On these first three titles I would like to make one urgent request, that the Committee consider very seriously the recommendation of ex- te.nsion this year rather than waiting for 19GB. I need not repeat the testimony you have heard previously tod'ay about the importance to local school planning, but I assure you that it is very great. In the amendments to title V of the Education Act, we a.re glad t.o ~ee the trust territories included, for many of our members are con- cerned that. the quality of education there he commensurate with that which we wish to provide, for American children, and we would hope that the funds authorized would be proportionately increased t.o cover this addition. We would specifically approve the revision of t.he apportionment formula in section 502(a), and the addition of part B for comprehen- sive educational planning and evaluation. We should prefer, and would ur~e, however, that studies of urban educational problems he con ducted cooperatively under state. authority, rather than separately. IVe should further prefer and urge that metropolitan planning in education in areas covering more than one state. be carried out co- operatively between states, with the assistance rather t.ha.n the iumthorizatiofl of the F.S. Commissioner of Education. Amendments to title VI of the Education Act, and to the Vocational Education Ac.t of 19G~: We very warmly support the proposed amend- ments to title VI of the Education Act, for the assistance of hmuudi- PAGENO="0639" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1461 ~capped children, and hope that this title may this year be fully funded. We are glad to see the proposal for developing innovative vocational education programs, and hope that in its implementation existing school structures will be broadened and enabled to include such education in comprehensive programs. Thank you very much for the opportunity to offer these views. Chairman PERKINS. Let me thank you, Mrs. Ryan, for your appear- ance here today and that of the National Congress of Parents and Teachers. Your statement has been most helpful. Has your organization all through the years supported the National Teacher Corps, I mean the last few years since the program ha.s been before the Congress? Mrs. RYAN. No. Our members have studied this very carefully over the past year. I think last summer was our first statement in its support. Since then we have asked our people to look at programs around the country and our support has been strengthened con- siderably. Chairman PERKINS. From the valuations that your organization has been able to retain and from your people, do you feel that the corps is doing a good job in the disadvantaged areas of the coi~ntry now? Mrs. RYAN. Yes. Chairman PERKINS. Those are reports that you are receiving from the worst neglected areas in the country where we do have the Teacher Corps. Mrs. RYAN. Our reports are all favorable. I do think, however, that the people in Lowell put their finger on one of the most important aspects of what the Teacher Corps is doing. As this Administrator said, we have had too much instruction and not enough education. The emphasis which the corps members are placing in this whole ap- proacli to working with these youngsters as individuals, "drawing them out" in it (as at least one translation of the word "education"), I think is a trend which is coining in education, which we can perhaps thank the disadvantaged youngsters for teaching us is something all children need, and I hope and I believe that this approach is going to spread throughout~ tea(her edlll(at 1011. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Steiger? Mr. STEIGER. Mrs. Ryan, you made a very good statement this after- noon. Thank you for your patience. Mrs. RYAN. Thank you, sir. Mr. STEIGEIi. May 1 ask two questions of you? What kind of emphasis, if any, has the Congress of Parents and Teachers placed prior to t.he Teacher Corps, for example, on improving the education that is available to teachers? You were here when the gentleman from Cleveland made a most eloquent statement. One of the things that he said was that tile teacher education, I don't remember his exact words, but it is woefully inadequate or deplorable or something along those lines. Has this been of concern to the PTA? Mrs. RYAN. I am not sure we have taken an active role in the change in that respect. Our work is more with the relationship between PAGENO="0640" 1462 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS teachers and parents and the welfare of children. I think our role has been supportive in nature rather than offering innovations as an organization. Mr. STIEIGER. What. kind of a reaction do you have either personally or within your organization to the teacher assistance program? Mrs. RYAN. We have tried to offer this assistance for the last several years, quite a few years, and this is one innovation we have urged. We have in various instances helped school people choose, screen, train PTA members for this purpose. A great many PTA members are filling this role, many more in t.he last year or two than, say, 10 years ago when we were first introducing or at least talking about the idea. Mr. STEIGER. You do feel, don't you, that this would be of assistance to ti'v and in(liviclualize more the capability of the teacher? Mrs. RYAN. Oh, yes; it is a very important assistance. I would say now that it is generally accepte.d as part of the conventional wis- dom but not for very long, maybe 2 years. Mr. STEIGER. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Ford? Mr. FORD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am very happy to see this constituent of mine. You have been helpful to t.he committee and members of the committee on several occasions in the past. As you well know, the interest that your orga- nization had in the overseas schools when others didn't know they existed played a large part in leading this committee 2 successive years to visit every pa.rt of the world in which these schools are located. Mrs. RYAN. We have been most grateful for your help. Mr. FORD. We now have a combined report of two groups that went. out last. year that will be ready very shortly. One of the points in that report this year was the fact that we did discover the problem that you have pinpointed with regard to children with special educa- t.ion problems. We were. disappointed~ hut not. necessarily surprised, to discover that there is no uniformity among the three military services and their treatment of dependents t.hat have every kind of variation of special problems. The Air Force has a rather firm policy with regard to the additional assignment overseas of parents with children having recognizable educational prOI)lelflS. The other two services tend to disregard it entirely. All three services do nothing after the child gets overseas. mainly because. they are hard pressed to do a job with the ordinary 1)rograms. The support you have drawn concerning the inadequacy of the libraries and textbooks themselves has been very helpful. Mr. Vance issued an executive order last year that by fiscal 1968 textbooks will be up to date. We discovered this year that that order has already had very remarkable results, but the one thing that is uniform throughout the three services is that the libraries are uniformly poor. `We. are hopeful that with the addition of the ove.rse.a schools to title II this year, we can ~ee a change take places and when we go hack on our next. investigation that we will see the effects of your eflorts and the efforts of this committee.. Thank you very much for staying around and missing your plane. PAGENO="0641" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1463 Mrs. RYAN. Well, thank you, sir. I am very glad to have done so. Chairman PERKINS. We appreciate your appearance here today, Mrs. Ryan. You have been very helpful. Mrs. RYAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. We appreciate the endorsement of the legisla- tion of the National Congress of Parents and Teachers. Thank you very much. The committee will recess until 9 :30 a.m. tomorrow morning. We will wind up the hearings tomorrow. (Whereupon, at 5 :03 p.m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at 9 :30 a.m., Saturday, March 18, 1967.) 75-492--67--pt. 2-41 PAGENO="0642" PAGENO="0643" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDICATION AMENDMENTS OF 1967 SATURDAY, MARCH 18, 1967 HousE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Co~r~r1rrEE ox EDUcATioN AND LABOR, Wa.shington, D.C. The committee met at 9 :30 a.in.. Piir~~ai~ to recess iii room ~175, Rayburii House Office Building, Hon. Carl I). Perkins (chairman of the committee) presiding. - Present: Representatives Perkins, Sche.uer, Dellenback~ and Ste.iger. Staff nieinbers present: Robert E. MeCord, senior specialist; H. D. Reed, Jr., general couiisel; William U. Gaul, associate general coun- sel; Benjamin F. Reeves, editor; Louise M. i)argans, research as- sistant; and Charles WT. Radcliffe, special education counsel for minority. Chairman P1~RKIxs. The committee will be in order. A quorum is present. We have Mr. Russell Gohie from the Martin County schools of Kentucky. WTe would be delighted to hear from you at this time, Mr. Goble. and we are interested in knowing how the Elementary and Secondary Education Act is working out in your county. STATEMENT OF R~USSELL GOBLE, MARTIN COUNTY SCHOOLS, KENTUCKY Mr. GOBLE. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I wish to congratulate the committee for its efforts in making funds avail- able through the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to local school districts especially those districts with low per capital income, a high rate of unemployment.. and a large number of culturally and economically deprived children. The programs are being well coordinated by the U.S. Office of Edu- cation, the State departments of education, and the local school dis- tricts. The guidelines, as a whole, are flexible enough to permit the local school districts to provide many of the needed services and facili- ties that. they have been deprived of in the past due to a lack of funds. Martin County has a low pci' capital income with little local revenue with which to provide an educational program that. is comparable to the programs in the districts having the taxable wealth. Elementary and Secondary Education Act funds are helping to bridge the gap and the impact of Federal aid, too, is producing desir- able results. 1465 PAGENO="0644" 1466 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Elementary and Secondary Education Act funds have made it pos- sible for Martin County to initiate a remedial reading program in which the services of teacher aids and remedial reading teachers have been provided to implement the regular classroom activities, Element arv school library services, lunches for indigent children, and a summer program for high school students from the low-income families with special emphasis on reading have been made possible. Elenientarv 1 ihrarv rooms and remedial reading laboratory rooms have been established in Martin County's seven consolidated element- ary centers. Books, instructional supplies, and modern equipment have been provided for the use of the librarians, remedial reading teachers, and regular classroom teachers. Some of the desirable results of the program are as follows: 1. Dropout rate has been reduced. 2. Overall increase in academic level of the students. 3. Higher percentage of attendance. 4. Improved attitude of low-income parents and children to- ward school. 5. Increased participation on the part of parents in commu- nity activities as well as educational activities. 6. Improvement in health and nutrition with elimination of many physical handicaps such as eye defects, hearing defects, and nutritional deficiencies. Dental problems have been reduced by ~)rovidillg a mobile dental clinic for children from low-income families. 7. Additional training for specialized personnel in supervision, remedial reading, and library science. Plans are underway for the development, of an improved program in mathematics, science, art, music, and physical fitness. The progranis provided by the Elementary and Secondary Educa- tion Act. should be continued because of the valuable services being rendered to children from low-income families and increased poten- tial for the construction of new buildings. I recommend that provision be made in the law whereby the poorer districts with heavier concentration of poverty could be permitted to secure grants and low-interest, long-term loans in order for them to provide the buildings necessary to carry out a successful educational program. Most of the school district.s in Eastern Kentucky have antiquated high schools with inadequate heating, lighting, labora- tories, lil)raries, and other facilities necessary for a program to meet the needs of the students. Without. some form of const.ruction aid the school districts can not meet. the increased building needs. All Federal aid money should be channeled through State depart- ments of education and prorated to the districts on the basis of need, taking into consideration local effort, in accordance with a well-de- velopedi educational plan approved by the State department of edu- cation and the U.S. Office of Education. There is considerable confusion and discontent concerning the op- eration of Heacistart. programs under the direction of the Office of Economic Opportunity, and under the present setup OEO, through community action, is dominating the Heacistart. programs on the basis that Headstart is not an educational activity, that it is an antipoverty PAGENO="0645" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1467 activity. They advocate total involvement of the children from the low-income families and total involvement of the parents from the low-income families to the exclusion of all other segments of society. The programs now being approved under OEO quidelines for a year around Headstart program in Martin County do not provide Head- start training for more than 25 percent of the children eligible to par- ticipate and do not provide employment for more than 5 percent of the parei~ts. The remaining 95 percent of the parents are expected to Participate in the program on a voluntary basis. The summer Headstart pro- gram would provide training for approximately 50 percent of the eli- gible children in Martin County. it is a hypothetical assumption that this plan is providing child development services for all of the cliii- dren or employment for all of the parents. The arbitrary guidelines of the Office of Economic Opportunity are in a constant process of change with considerable indecision in the Office of Economic Opportunity about the application of the guide- lines in the local districts. In addition to the guidelines certain special grant conditions are imposed upon the boards of education that are not provided in the guidelines and are not in accordance with the guidelines. The question should be resolved as to whether Headstart is an edu- cational activity and should be carried out by the boards of educa- tion working with community organizations or an antipovery pro- gram and should be carried out by community action organizations or other civic groups. If the local boards of education are to assume fiscal responsibility it is mandatory that they have fiscal control. It will never work suc- cessfully to have two agencies attempting to operate the same program with community action agencies selecting the personnel by which the boards of education are to perform services in accordance with the intents and purposes of Headstart programs. Boards of education select personnel to perform certain services on the basis of qualifications. Community action attempts to impose on the boards of education the selection of personnel on the basis of poverty without regard to qualifications, presumably because of the fear that boards of education will use nepotism or politics. At the same time the boards of education are held responsible for the success or failure of the Headstart program. This can only result in the children being deprived of the benefits for which Headstart was originally organized. The program should either be operated by the board of education or should be completely taken out of the hands of the board of educa- tion in eastern Kentucky. If it is the intent to perform services for the parents of the low-income families, then a special training pro- gram should be set up for them in which they are paid for so many days of systematic instruction and work experience in connection with the Headstart program. In this way boards of education could employ competent people who could perform the services in the Headstart program and at the same time provide services for the parents. While the intents and purposes of Office of Economic Opportunity may be good ~mnd the~ OEO legislation enacted by Congress is valuable PAGENO="0646" 1468 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS legislation, it is unethical and not in keeping with sound educational principles for the Office of Economic Opportunity to write the guide- lh~es by which boards of education are to operate }Jeadstart programs without permitting the school people to be represented or their beliefs considered in the formulation of the rules by which they operate. Procedures should be evaluated objectively by boards of education and they should have the right to make the necessary changes at the local level. The children of Appalachia need Headstart training and boards of education, in general, will accept the responsibility for providing the services; but. they cannot afford to turn buildings and equipment over to personnel elected by someone else and be responsible for perform- rug the services in the Headstart program. i. us a represeiitatiVe of the Martin County Board of Education, wholeheartedly recommend that the Headstart funds be channeled through the TT.S. O~ce of Education to the various State departments of eduea~ ion. I further recoii~mend that. the State departments of education dis- tribute those funds to those boards of education which operate Head- start. programs. I ani certain that school people will be happy to cooperate with eomiiiunity action and all other community organiza- tion~ in operating ITea(lstait progiains. I thank the members of the committee for permission to appear and express niy ViewS. Chairman PEn!~I~s. Let. me congratulate you. Mr. Goble. I have known of your work a~ supervisor ~ii the Martin County school system fm~ some while and some time. You have made an outstanding con- tribution to the school system and I personally want to congratulate you on your evaluat ion of the results obtained from the present programs in your county under the Elementary and Secondary Educa- t.ion Act where you evaluate the work of title I by stat.ing that the dropout. rate has been reduced and that. there has been an overall increase in the academic level of the. students, a greater and better percentage of attendance, and there has been much more interest from the standpoint, of the price as the result of time Elementary and Sec- ondarv Education Act. You are getting increased participation and involvement from the Standj)oint of price: and being able to put. on so many special programs such as remedial reading and library sciences and other enrichment programs. The evaluation of this piece of legislation as you have pointed out to us from Martin County, Ky., makes me feel good. As we all know Martin County is one of our low-income counties throughout the Na- tion. It ]ust goes to prove that the results obtained from the passage of the legislation are commencing t.o pay off. I want to thank you for that report this morning. Mr. GOBLE. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. Mr. SCHEUER. I was very much interested in your testimony. I notice that on page 3 you say that only 25 percent of the children are eligible to participate. Are you receiving the benefits of Headstart? Mr. Gomn~r. We have approximately 450 students who are eligible from age standpoint and income standpoint. PAGENO="0647" ELEMENTARY A,ND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1469 Mr. SCIIE~ER. And need, I take it? Mr. GOBLE. Yes. We designed a program for 230. We have a program approved for 130 at the present time. `We have a grant approved for 130 at the present time. Mr. SCHEUER. How much more in the way of funding support would you like to have for the children in your county? Mr. GOBLE. I think our disagreement. perhaps is not, so much money. We appreciate what we are getting. It is the way we are forced to operate. Mr. SCHEUER. I don't want to get into that controversy this morn- ing. I just want to get to the one question of the resources. Are you satisfied with the leve.l of help you are getting from the Federal Government or do you think the children in your district would bene- fit from getting a higher level of help? Mr. GOBLE. They would benefit from a higher level of help. Mr. SCHEUER. Of the percentage of children now being taken care of, how many more would you like to get in? Mr. GOBLE. One hundred more. Mr. SCITEIJER. Instead of 130, it would be 230, almost a doubling of your program? Mr. GOBLE. Yes. Mr. SCHEUER. `Would this be year around or just the summer program? Mr. GOBLE. That would get into our problem of operation but it is year around. Mr. SCHEUER. Do they have comprehensive health services and nutrition? Mr. GOBLE. Yes; but not nutrition. Mr. Scm~E1~. But. they do have comprehensive health services? Mr. GOBLE. I think so. Mr. ScilErrEn. Dental care? Mr. G-OBLE. Yes. Mr. SCHE'U-ER. Do they have a school lunch during the school year and the summer? Mr. GOBLE. They have no cooks in the summer. Mr. SCHEP-ER. So t.here would be something to add there. Your testimony was very provocative and stimulating and I thank you very much. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much for your appearance here today, Mr. Goble. Do we have any other superintendent of schools in the room at the present time? I am going to call on the administration witnesses right at this time. We would like to have you give us a report as to the operation of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. `While they are in the process of assembling I would like to ask unanimous consent that inasmuch as this is the last day of the hearings to insert in the record at this time excerpts from the National Educational Association Research Report in 1966 concerning the demand for new teachers as a st.udy made concerning the teacher shortage which I feel would be very helpful to have some evidence on the demand for new teache.rs, PAGENO="0648" 1470 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS on the shortage, the reasons why so many teachers have left the dis- advantaged areas. I think this study is pertinent in this record. If there is no objec- tion I will ask that the. study be inserted in the record. (The document referred to follows:) [Excerpts from NEA Research Report 1966-R16, October 1966] II. THE DEMAND FOR NEW TEACHERS This section contains estimates of the demand for new teachers and the demand for beginning teachers. The separate estimate of the demand for beginning teachers is given to allow comparison with the supply of beginning teachers reviewed in Section I of this report. Following a review of the difference between the estimated demand for new and beginning teachers are descriptions of three estimates of the demand for new teachers. Finally this section reviews the characteristics of the demand for new teachers as shown in the assignments given to these persons during the 1965-66 session in 29 states reporting this information. DTt'FERENCE BETWEEN DEMAND FOR NEW AND DEMAND FOR BEGINNING TEACHERS The difference between the estimated demand for new teachers and the esti* mated demand for beginning teachers is based on an estimate of differences in the types of vacancies created by teacher turnover. The estimated demand for new teachers is directed to filling all of the positions vacated by the depar- ture of approximately 8 percent of the teachers each year. The estimated demand for beginning teachers is based on an assumption that re-entering former teachers normally will fill between one-fourth and one-half of the positions created by teacher turnover. The U.S. Office of Education reported that the number of teachers who were re-entering active service following a leave of absence or other interruption in their teaching careers was almost half (48.0 percent) of the number of positions vacated by teacher turnover.1 The number of positions created by the 8.1 percent teacher turnover which were not filled by the number of persons re-entering teaching amounted to 4.2 percent of the number of teachers employed in the fall of 1959. Summarized in Table 9 are the withdral and re-entry rates reported in the U.S. Office of Education Study. TABLE 9.-E.~timuted dcniand for beginning teachers, based on teacher turnover rates in public schools. 1939-GO Percent of the fall 1959 staff Group Elementary I Secondary Total Men Women~ Total Men Women~ Total Men Women Total - (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Teachers separating and not transferring tO new position 5.9 8.4 8.1 6.5 9.9 8.1 6.3 8.8 8.1 Teachersre-entering 3.7 4.1 4.1 2.7 4.7 3.6 3.0 4.2 3.9 Difference (positions to be filled by beginning teachers) 2.2 4.3 4.0 3.8 5.2 4.5 3.3 4.6 4.2 Source: Based on: Lindenfeld. Frank. Teacher Turnover in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools, 1959-60. U.S. Department of STealth. Education, and Welfare; Office of Education, Circular No. 678; Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1963; p. 9. 1 Lindenfeld. Frank, Teacher Turnover in. Public Elenventary and Secondary Schools, 1959-60. U.S. Department of Health. Education, and Welfare, Office of Education, Circu- lar No. 67S. Washington. D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1963. 28 p. PAGENO="0649" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1471 TABLE lO.-Estiincitcd percent of Ieee/f inq pcJ.~iti(11ls being erC(lted by teacher turnover in lt;57-5S ~tntl in 1!G9-GO Group Percent of the fall staff size ~ I Elementary Secondary Total 1957-58 1959-60 1957-58 1959-60 1957-58 1959-60 (1) 11. 2 4.8 ~ 6.4 (3) 8. 1 4. 0 4.1 (4) (5) 10.4 8.0 4. 1 3. 6 ~ 6.3 4.4 (6) 10.9 4.5 6.4 (7) 8.1 3.9 4.2 Teachers leaving the profession Teachers re-entering active employmenG - Difference (vacancies created by turn- over) Source: Based on: Lindenfeld, Frank. Teacher Turnover in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools, 1959-60. U.S. Department of health, Education, and Welfare; Office of Education, Circular No. 678; Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1963; p. 15. (1959-60 data adjusted to represent 48 states and the District of Columbia for comparability with the 1957-58 survey data.) It is now known to what extent the number of persons returning to teaching during 1959-60 may have reflected the inipact of a shortage of beginning teachers in that year. A shortage could contribute to the retention or recall of margin- ally qualified personnel. An NEA Research Division survey of public-school teachers in 1955-56 found that 9 percent of all public-school teachers in April 1956 were not teaching in April 1955, and that approximately half of these (49 percent) were in college in April 1955. As reported in Table 23. the supply of beginning teachers was lower in 1955 and 1956 than has been observed in subsequent years. In an earlier study on teacher turnover (1957-58), the U.S. Office of Educa- tion reported that 10.9 percent of the teachers in the fall of 1957 left the pro- fession and the number of re-entering teachers amounted to 4.5 percent of the number of teachers employed in the fall of 1957. A review of the net loss as a percent of the number of teachers in the fall at the beginning of the session as observed in the tw-o U.S. Office of Education studies is provided in Table 10. Tile rate of re-entry was slightly greater among women than among men, and w-as greater at the elenientary level than at the secondary-school level, pos- sibly the latter being attributable in large part to the sex-related difference. The percents of the fall staff representing the re-emitering teachers (lid not vary as markedly between the two studies as (lid the percent of all teachers leaving their position. The differences in the rate of turnover and in the demand for beginning teachers observed in these studies documents tile possibility of iather wide vari- ations over a period cf years. The U.S. Office of Education studies show van- ation in these rates of teacher turnover among school districts grou~)ed by region. Studies of teacher turnover reported by several states suggest there are wi(le differences aniong the states in the rate of teacher separations. These variations suggest that the national estimates be treated ill only general terms With allowances l)eing given to imossible (lifferencesi over a PetiO(i of time and for individual states or regions. Two NEA Research I )ivision surveys of teaches separations in I 91)3-64 and in 19(4-G5 iii school systems which erirull 2~)( 0 (11 mcire pupils provide an in- (lica tiosi of conditions since 19U0. The time period of the N EA surveys was between .Juiy 1 and June 30 of the fhlowing year while the time period of the U.S. Office of Educatioll studies was het~veen tile (liellilig it classes ill the fall and the opening of classes the following fall. The separation rates differ from the turnover rates because of the inclusion of the tc:icliers u-ho transfer to otller school systems. Sunlnlarized below are the separation rates observed among tile larze school systems in the four stu(hies. Intnrni:i (1)11 reported by tile NEA Research Division suggests that the ~eI);1ratiois rates during recent PAGENO="0650" 1472 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS years may be abnut the same as reported for 19~9-6O in the U.S. Office of Edu- cation study. un percent] Year Separation rate in school sys- tems having 25,000 or more enrolled Separation rate in all school systems 1957-58 (USOE) 1959-60 cUSOE) 1963-64 (NEA) 1964-65 (NEA) 14.7 12.5 11.4 11.4 17.0 13.4 The following assumptions may provide an estimate of the demand for begin- ning teachers to fill positions created by normal teacher turnover: (a) that about 8 percent of the classroom teachers at the beginning of a school session will leave the teaching profession before the beginning of the following session, and (b) that at least one-fourth and as many as one-half of the positions created by this exodus (between 2 and 4 percent of the number of teachers employed in the fall) will be filled by persons who have interrupted their careers. It is further as- sumed that these variables will fluctuate with changes in the adequacy of the supply of beginning teachers, the total demand for qualified teachers, composition of the teaching staff, characteristics of the pool of former teachers, and the eco- nomic conditions influencing turnover in the instructional staff. The question- able bases for these assumptions, the wide fluctuations in the conditions in- fluencing their accuracy, and the need for additional data to support differences applicable to each sex and subject grouping suggest that the resulting estimates be treated only in very general terms. The midpoint of the estimates that between 4 and 6 percent of the fall staff of full-time teachers will leave and not he replaced by re-entering former teachers is used as the base for estimating the demand for beginning teachers created by teacher turnover. Conversely, estimating that the re-entry of former teachers is equal to about 3 percent of the number of full-time teachers in the fall of 1965, the estimated demand for beginning teachers may be derived by reducing the estimated demand for new teachers by 28,756 at the elementary-school level and by 22,231 at the secondary-school level. CRITERIA FOR ESTIMATING DEMAND FOR NEW TEACHERS Three equally useful estimates of the demand for new teachers are presented in this report. The first shows the teacher demand related to a minimum stand- ard, the second reviews the teacher demand related to current practices, and the third is an adjustment to the second to account for the expected influence of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. Components of the first estimate are the minimum standards of staffing char- acteristics required for effective instruction in the public schools. This estimate is based on an assumption that the demand for teachers must be related to achieving at least the minimum level of quality in staffing for public educa- tion. The estimate based on this assumption is termed the Quality Criterion Estimate (QCE). The components of the second estimate are the trends in the improvement of staffing characteristics of public schools in recent years being continued in the 1966-67 school session. This estimate is based on an assumption that the de- mand for teachers in the fall of 1966 is the expected number of new teachers who will actually be employed at the beginning of the 1966-67 school session as in- dicated from past trends in staffing practices. This second estimate is termed the Trend Criterion Estimate (TOE). The third estimate is an adjustment to the Trend Criterion Estimate to account for the growth In staff size which is expected to result from the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 19135. This third estimate is termed the Adjusted Trend Criterion Estimate (ATCE). PAGENO="0651" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1473 The numbers of new teachers required by each criterion for estimating the demand for new teachers in 1966-67 are presented and discussed in the following sections. The Quality Criterion Estimate The Quality Criterion Estimate is based on the number of new teachers needed to achieve immediately a standard for minimum quality in the staffing of public- school classrooms. The following are discussed separately as components of this estimate: (a) the number of new teachers needed to fill new positions being created to accommodate enrollment changes; (b) the number of new teachers needed to replace the teachers who are interrupting or terminating their careers; (c) the number of teachers having substandard professional qualifications who need to be upgraded or replaced; (d) the number of new teachers needed to re- duce overcrowded classes to reasonable maximum sizes; and (e) the number of new teachers needed to provide adequate staffing of new educational offerings, added special instructional services, and reorganization for instruction. The Quality Criterion Estimate of teacher demand should be useful to the teaching profession, civic leaders, public officials, and research analysts in asses- sing the manpower requirements for attaining minimum quality in public educa- tion. This estimate shows the demand for teachers required by a minimum level of quality in the staffing practices applied to all classrooms without consideration ot the obstacles to attaining this standard immediately. The Demand for New Teachers, Based on the Quality Criterion Estimate- Summarized in Table 11 are the estimated numbers of new teachers needed to achieve the Quality Criterion in each of several components of teacher demand. The estimated total demand for 364,500 new teachers is an increase of 138,500 positions (8.1 percent) over the number of full-time teachers employed in the fall of 1965. Time components of this estimate are described in the following paragraphs. Increased Enrollment-The estimates shown in the table are preliminary pro- jections developed by the NEA Research Division by using enrollment and staffing data of recent years. These preliminary estimates will be reviewed and revised by officials in the individual states prior to publication by the Research Division in December 1966. Additional discussion of these estimates is provided in the discussion of the Trend Criterion Estimate. Owing to the use of projections of staffing as related to enrollments in recent years, this estimate may reflect a small part of the demand for new teachers estimated separately in some other components. Teacher Turnover-The estimates are based on an assumption that 8 percent of the full-time teachers in the fall of 1965 will interrupt or terminate their careers before the opening of schools in the fall of 1966. The major studies which have contributed to this estimate were reviewed in the discussion of the differences in the demand for new and for beginning teachers. Since this turn- over rate was observed during years in which general improvement of the educa- tional qualifications of the staff were being realized, the estimated demand may overlap somewhat the following component. Replacement of Teachers Having substandard Qualifications-These estimates are based on an assumption that the minimum educational requirement for qualified teachers is completion of the bachelor's degree and the teachers having less than a bachelor's degree need to be upgraded or replaced. For many of these teachers who lack only one or two years of college this replacement may be on a short-term basis while they return to teacher preparation institutions to complete their degree. The estimate of the number of elementary-school teachers lacking the bache- lor's degree is a projection of data in the summary of the educational qualifica- tions of elementary-school teachers listed in Table 30 of Section IV. The 32 re- porting states employed approximately 57 percent of the total number of full- time elementary-school teachers in the fall of 1965.2 The 52,160 elementary- school teachers not having the bachelor's degree represent 9.4 percent of all ele- mentary-school teachers in the 32 reporting states. Applying this percentage to the number of full-time elementary-school teachers in all states (958,541) pro- vides an estimate that 90,103 elementary-school teachers had not completed the bachelor's degree during session 1965-66. 2 u S Department of Health Education, and Welfare, Office of Education, Fall 1965 Rtatistics of Public Elementary and Secondary Day Schools: Pupils, Teachers, Instruction Rooms, and E~rpenditure8. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1966. 31 p. PAGENO="0652" 1474 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS The data in Table 27 of Section IV shows an estimate that 10.9 percent of all elementary-school teachers in 1965-66 lacked the bachelor's degree. Applying this percentage to the total number of elementary-school teachers employed in 1965-66 provides an estimate that 104,481 elementary-school teachers lacked the bachelor~s degree. Tue estimate of 78,361 elementary-school teachers allows for about 25 percent of the 104,500 elementary-school teachers lacking the bachelor's degree to have completed the degree requirements or to have resigned prior to the 1966-67 session. The estimate of demand at the secondary-school level is based on the esti- mated percentage of secondary-school teachers who did not have the bachelor's degree in 19~5-56, shown in Table 27 in Section IV. The estimate of 2.1 percent applied to the 741.043 full-time secondary-school teachers employed in the fall of 1965 indicates that 15,562 secondary-school teachers did not have the bache- br's degree in 1965-60. The estimate that 11,672 of these need to be replaced is based ott an assumption that 25 percent of the 15,562 teachers lacking the degree will have subsequently graduated or have resigned. TABLE l1._Extifllatcil demand for nctc teachers, based on the quality criterion Estimated demand for new teachers Source of demand __________ _____________ _____________ Elementary Secondary Total (P (2) (3) (4) Stad requirement of increased enrollment 21, 700 24, 709 46,418 Teacherturnover 76,683 59,283 135,966 Replacement of teachers having substandard qualifications 78,361 11,672 90,033 Reduction of overcrowded classes 18, 734 8,352 27,086 Special instructional services 37,050 27,960 65,000 Total 232,537 131,966 364,503 General support for these estimates is provided by the reports from the states to the U.S. Office of Education showing the number of full-time classroom teachers who do not meet the state regular certification requirements for the positions which they occupy. The total number of substandard teachers reported in the fall 1965 survey was 81,748 teachers: 51,632 in elementary-schools and 30,116 in secondary-schoob~. Owing to differences atnong the states in the minimum edu- cational requirements for certification. some of which certify teachers with less than a bachelors degree. and differences in specific requirements beyond the at- tainment of the bachehis degree, the data from the U.S. Office of Education fall survey are not entirely comparable with the estimates being used in this report. Reduction of Orcrcrowded (`lasses-A national survey by the NEA Research Division in 15-G0 provi(les a general estimate of tile distribution of class size and teacher bad in public schools. These percentage distributions were applied to the total number of full-time teachers in the fall of 1965 to obtain an estimate of the number of persons who may have beeta assigned extremely large classes durinz 19(;~-00. The intervals in these distrilaitions provide a base for these estimates of the miflimnulli numbers of additional teachers needed to reduce maximum size of classes ill elementary selaools to no more than 34 pupils each and the maximum average daily teacher load in secondary schools to no more than 199 pupils. Data on the staffing practices for classes having shortened sessions or double- shift. sessins are not available. Therefore, this summary does not include an estimate of additional demand for new teachers resulting from these classes. 51,ceiql Instructional ~ervices-In this classification are the new teachers needed to provide special instructional services, enlarge the scope of educational PAGENO="0653" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1475 offerings, tuid l)rovide special programs for imiuls having special learning needs (physically, mentally, emotionally handicapped, the culturally disadvantaged, etc.). It is estimated that at least 6~.OOO additional teachers are needed for this component of demand. Support for this estimate is provided by the U.S. Office at Education projec- tions which list 50,000 new teachers being needed for 19GU-U7 as au effect of the Elementary and Second Education Act of 196~. Estisna t'd D cm a ad for Beg in~u jug Teach ers Based on tli e Q u a I ity Criterion- Listed below are the estimated numbers of beginning teachers needed to achieve the demand based on the Quality Criterion Estimate. This estimate is based on an assumption that among the 8 percent of 1965-66 teaching positions vacated by teacher turnover, 5 percent will need to be filled by beginning teachers. Number of teachers Elementary high school Total Demand for new teachers based on the quality criterion estimate Expected reentry of former teachers Demand for beginning teachers 232,537 131,966 364,503 28, 756 22,231 50,987 203,781 109,735 313,516 The Trend Criterion Estimate The Trend Criterion provides an estimate of the number of new teachers who will actually be employed by public school systems in the school year 1966-67 as indicated by recent staffing practices. This estimate is projected from informa- tion about the numbers of new teachers employed in recent years. The demand for new teachers in this estimate reflects a continuation of current trends toward improved stuffing conditions rather than immediate achievement of the standards of minimum quality in the staffing of clasrooms provided by the Quality Criterion Estimate. The projections based on the Trend Criterion should be especially useful to college and university counselors of potential teachers, to individuals planning careers in teaching, to former teachers considering re-entry into teaching, and to educational leaders. This projection provides an estimate of the immediate condition of teacher demand-the minimum number of employment opportunities for beginning and re-entering teachers during the school year 1966-67. The Demand for New Teachers, Based on the Trend Criterion Estimate-Esti- mates of the number of teaching positions to be filled by the supply of new teach- ers for the opening of a given school session may be based on trends observed in two previous components: (a) positions created by the teachers who are termi- nating or interrupting their careers in the public schools during or at the close of the preceding school year; and (b) positions being created or eliminated as a result of changes in enrollment, organization for instruction, and in the pupil- teacher ratio. The estimates may involve either an assumption that the trends will continue without major change or an assumption that marked change will occur owing to changes in the conditions influencing these variables. The estimated demand for new teachers based on the first of these assumptions (that past trends will continue) is described below. The estimated effect of the second assumption is discussed in the description of the Adjusted Trend Criterion Esti- mate (ATCE). Demand Created by Teacher Tuñmover (TCE)-Earlier reports in this series have estimated that about 8 percent of the teachers leave the profession each year. The U.S. Office of Education study, Teacher Turnover in Public Elemen- tary and Secondary Schools, 1959-60, noted that the number of teachers leaving the profession amounted to 8.1 percent of the number of teachers employed in the fall of 1959 (see Table 9). These positions created by teacher turnover will need to be filled by new (beginning and re-entering) teachers. Included in this estimate is the typical proportion of teachers being encouraged to resign owing to their substandard qualifications. PAGENO="0654" 1476 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMEN'rS TABLE 12.-Total estimated demand for beginninq teachers in 1966-67, by major component, based on the trend criterion Source Estimate d demand for begiunli ig teachers Elementary Secondary Total Low High Low High Low High (1) (2) (3) (4)~ (5) (6) (7) Replacement of teachers leaving the pro- fessioii and lot being replaced by re- eiirering teachers ` 38342 57. 512 29. 642 44, 463 67, 984 101,975 New leaching positions being created 2 -- 21, 709 21, 709 24, 709 24, 709 46. 418 46, 418 Total demand 60,051 79, 221 54,351 69, 172 114, 402 l48,3~ Midpoint 601136 61,761 131,397 1 Includes the estimatel nunihers of teachers being encouraged to resign owing to substandard profes- sional qualifications, based on trends of past several years. Includes the estimated numbers of teachers being employed to provide enlarged programs and services~ to reduce tile number of overcrowded classes, to continue to improve the pupil-teacher ratio, based on trends. of the past several years. 1 Total of the elementary and secondery estimates. lii lpoi it of low ii iii high estimates based on reentry equal to 4 and 2 percent, respectively, of the teachers mplo yecl in fall 1965. Reports from the states in the fall of 1965 to the U.S. Office of Education show there were 967,635 elementary-school teachers and 748,650 secondary-school teachers in the public schools of the nation. These include 9,094 elementary- and 7,607 secondary-school teachers who had part-time employment. Thus, the number of new teachers needed to fill positions created by an 8-per-- cent turnover is estimated to comprise 76,683 elementary-school teachers and 59.2S3 secondary-school teachers (based on the number of full-time teachers re- ported in the U.S. Office of Education survey: Fall 1965 Statistics of Publie 4$c/iools). Teachers Needed To Fill New Positions (TCE)-The demand for new teachers. is influenced by the creation of new positions for increased enrollment, changes in organizational placement of certain grades, and other organizational changes influencing the pupil-teacher ratio (reduction of the number of large classes and. provision of specialized educational services). Growth of school enrollments and staff requirements may be estimated only iii general terms pending development of specific indicators of the influence of federal programs related to public education. Projections of the total demand for teachers based on the trends in staff growth during the past few years are prepared during the summer by the NEA Research Division. These are sent to the states for verification or change before becoming final estimates of staff size. Preliminary estimates prepared by the NEA Research Division indicate there will he 989.344 elementary-school teachers and 773.359 secondary-school teachers in 1966-67. These are full-time teachers and equated full-time positions of part- tinie teachers. The increased number of elementary-school teachers (21,709) represents a 2.2-percent increase over the fall staff size in 1965. The increased number of secondary-school teachers (24.709) represents an increase of 3.3 per- cent over the number of secondary-school teachers reported in fail 1905. The growth of the staff between fall 1964 and fall 1965 was 2.7 percent among elementary-school teachers and 5.6 percent among secondary-school teachers, as reported in the U.S. Office of Education fall survey statistics. The NEA Research Division's preliminary projections of staff growth are used in this report to estimate the demand for new teachers. These preliminary estimates fall between the two U.S. Office of Education estimates, one of which excludes the estimated effect of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. Total Estimated Demand for New Teachers Based on the Trend Criterion- Combination of the estimated number of vacant positions created by an S-percent turnover of full-time teachers employed last session with the projected growth in staff size provides an estimate that 98,392 new elementary-school teachers; PAGENO="0655" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1477 and 83,992 new secondary-school teachers will be needed for the 196d-67 session. The estimated demand for new elementary-school teachers represents 53.9 per- cent of the total estimated demand for new teachers. Information in Table 16 of this report obtained from a varyintr number of states in earlier studies shows the relative demand for new elementary- and high-school teachers has been almost equalized in recent years. If these states are representative of the national pattern, the difference in the demand for new elementary- and new high-school teachers may be smaller thait the 14,400 teachers estimated above. Total Estimated Demand for Beginning Teachers, Based on the Trend Cr1- terion-Combination of the components of the demand for beginning full-time public-school teachers discussed in the preceding paragraphs provides an esti- mate of the total demand which is shown in Table 12. The range of these estimates is about 19,000 teachers at the elementary-school level and about 15,000 teachers at the high-school level. The midpoints of these ranges are used in subsequent comparisons of teacher supply and demand. These midpoints pro- vide an estimated demand for 69,636 beginning teachers in elementary schools and 61.761 beginning teachers in high schools. An Alternate Estimate of the Demand for Beqinning Teachers Based on the Trend Criterion-An alternate procedure may be used to obtain an estimate of the demand for beginning teachers in 196t~-d7. This procedure produces from the estimated number of beginning teachers employed in 1b65-66. an estimate of the number needed in 1966-437 to fill vacancies created by teacher turnover. Information obtained through a two-stage random sampling survey of all public-school teachcers during the spring of 194343 provides an alternate estimate of the number of beginning teachers which were employed in 19(35-66. These data were obtained for the NEA Research Division study. AS'tatus of the inter- lean Public-School Teacher, and are summarized in Table 13. The estimates for 1965-66 are greater than the estimates obtained in a similar study con- ducted in 1960-61. In that study the beginning teachers represented 8.0 percent rather than 8.7 percent of all teachers. TABLE 13.-An estimate of the percent of public school teachers wh~ were beginning teach (`I'S, ,S-prtn!/ 19(36 Percent of teachers who were beginning teachers Ratio of SE Level Population estimate Number in to simple Standard sample random Estimate error sample SE Low (-2SE) High (+2SE) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Elementary Secondary Total 7. 5 10.1 0.80 .98 5.9 8.1 9. 1 12.1 8.7 2.039 1,879 3,919 8.7 .63 7.4 (7) 1,064 1,04-4 1,064 Source: Estimate is derived by combining the information obtained from 2 samples drawn from the same sampling frame. Time increased number of individuals allows greater reliability in the estimate. 1 sample was drawn for a periodic national survey of teachers and the other for the REX Research Divi- sions "Status of the American Public-School Teacher, 1965-66" (a research study in process). These 1965-GO percentage estimates were applied to the total number of full- time teachers to obtain the estimated number of beginning teachers employed in 1965-66. The range of ±2 standard errors was used to establish a .95 per- cent confidence interval for the estimate. The number of new positions created for the 1965-66 session was subtracted from the total number of beginning teachers to obtain an estimate of the number of beginning teachers needed to fill positions vacated through staff turnover. The percent of the staff of full- time teachers before enlargement, which is represented by the number of be- ginning teachers needed to fill positions vacated through staff turnover, was applied to the number of full-time teachers in 1965-66 to obtain an estimate of the number of beginning teachers needed for this purpose in 11966 67. PAGENO="0656" 1478 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS The percents of full-time teachers in 1964-65 represented by the number of beginning teachers needed in 1965-66 to replace separating teachers are within the range of 3.5 to 6.8 percent in elementary and 3.0 to 7.2 percent at the high- sthool level. The projected numbers of beginning teachers needed in 1966-67 based on these percents of the 1965-66 staff size and the projected staff enlarge- ment are summarized in Table 14. The numbers of beginning teachers at the midpoints of these estimates are greater than the earlier estimates given in Table 12 by only 1,438 elementary- school teachers (2.1 percent) and by only 741 high-school teachers (1.2 percent). The demand for beginning elementary-school teachers in this estimate repre- sents 53.2 percent of the total demand for beginning teachers. The overlapping range of the estimates and the difference of 8,000 beginning teachers between the two levels suggest that the demand for beginning teachers is not widely different between the two levels. TABLE 14.-~4n alternate estimate of the number of beginning teachers to be em- ployed in public schools in session 1966-67, based on the trend criterion Source (1) Estimated demand for beginning teachers Elementary High school Low (2) 33.548 21. 709 High (3) 65.181 21, 709 Low High (4) (5) 22,231 53,355 24,709 24,709 Replacement of teachers New teaching positions Total Midpoint 55,257 86,890 71,074 46,940 78,064 62,502 The Adjusted Tren4 Criterion Estimate The trends in dessiand for qualified public-school teachers for a given school year may be changed as a result of changes in various factors such as the fol- lowing: Major modification in tile school program and assignment load of teachers Enrollment growth related to enlarged educational programs Reduction in the ratio of pupils per teacher to provide special programs being encouraged through federal and state legislation Change in the rate by which persons having substandard certification are being replaced Elimination of large classes. Some of these conditions have been influencing the demand for new teachers during the past several years. The trends in staffing practices observed in the past are included in the data used to derive the estimates of teacher demand based on the Trend Criterion. For example, information in Section IV of this report shows marked improvement in the educational qualifications of elemen- tary-school teachers during the past 10 years. Owing to the lack of precise data, it is difficult to estimate the specific effects of new conditions influencing some of the components of teacher demand. For example, present data do not allow identification of the number of teachers being counted in regular staff turnover or attrition who have substandard certification and are encouraged to resign largely because of this condition. Total Demand for New and Beginning Teachers. Base4 on the ADJUSTED TREND CRITERION ESTIMATE-A minimum estimate of change to be ex- pected in the recent trends in the staffing of public schools is provided by the U.S. Office of Education. Projections of Educational Statistics to 197~-75, 1965 edition, shows an estimate of 34,000 additional new teachers needed for 1965-66 and 50.000 additional new teachers needed for 1966-67 as a result of the Elemen- tary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. This estimate projects that the number of full-time and part-time teachers in public schools will rise in the fall PAGENO="0657" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1479 of 1966 to 1,014,000 elementary-school teachers and 779,000 secondary-school teachers. The increase of 46,000 elementary-school teachers and 30,000 second- ary-school teachers represents 4.8 percent and 4.0 percent enlargement over the number employed in the fall of 1965. Since the full effect of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 was not reflected in the staff size reported in the fall of 1965, the Trend Criterion Estimate does not account for this new factor influencing the demand for teachers. Use of an estimate that 50,000 additional new teachers will be employed in 1966-67 and application of the U.S. Office of Education estimate that 60 percent of these added teachers will be placed in elementary schools provides an esti- mate that 30,000 new elementary-school teachers and 20,000 new secondary- school teachers will be required in the fall of 1966. These are added to the Trend Criterion Estimate to establish the Adjusted Trend Criterion Estimate of demand for new teachers . The total staff estimated by this process comprises 1,019,344 elementary-school teachers and 793,359 high-school teachers. The Ad- justed Trend Criterion Estimate of the total demand for teachers exceeds the U.S. Office of Education estimates by 0.5 percent at the elementary-school level and by 1.8 percent at the secondary-school level. The total demand for new and beginning teachers based on the Adjusted Trend Criterion Estimate is shown below: Group Numb er of teachers needed Elementary Secondary Total Beginning teachers New teachers 99,636 128,392 81, 761 103,992 181,397 232,394 Other Factors Inflaencin.g the Demand for New Teachers The [.5. Office of Education has estimated that 14,040 new teachers will be needed in the nonpublic schools in the fall of 1964i. It has beeii estimated that 1,800 new teachers will be needed in the dependent schools overseas. Replace- ment may be required for an estimated 300 experienced teachers and 1,200 begin- ning teachers if the Teacher Corps is fully implemented. The normal flow of experienced teachers to advanced training may be increased by the estimated 900 fellowships for experienced teachers at teacher-training institutions as pro- vided by the Higher Education Act of 1965. Additional vacancies are certain as experienced teachers accept specialized positions being established through the impact of federal support to programs related to public education or which require persons having the characteristics of effective teachers. For example, the number of guidance counselors has almost trebled to 35,000 persons during the seven years following passage of the Na- tional Defense Education Act. The provision of funds to employ remedial in- struction specialists, school social workers, research analysts, program coordi- nators, state department of education staff members, and other 1)OSitions outside the classroom will attract an unknown number of teachers. The effect of these programs upon the typical components of Teacher Su~J~- and Demand has not been documented. The tide of increased enrollments is being felt at the 2-year and 4-year col- lege level and the number of public-school teachers moving to these levels may increase markedly, thereby opening many positions for new teachers in the elementary and secondary schools. It has been estimated that in the junior colleges alone, 100,000 more teachers will be needed within the next 10 years. Probably the general shortage in other occupations which attract young people having at least the bachelor's degree and the increased demands of the military services are contributing also to an increase in the exodus of qualified teachers and the loss of potential teachers. It is difficult to estimate the extent these conditions are changing the entry ~ate of potential teachers and the turnover rate of experienced teachers. It seeiii~ b- vious, however, that the demand for teachers proiected by each of the three sets of criteria should be considered as minimum estimates. 7i-402---C7--pt. 2-42 PAGENO="0658" 1480 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Summary of the Estimates of Demand for New Teachers Listed below are the total numbers of new teachers who will be needed In the fall of 1960 as determined by the three criteria. An estimate of the demand for beginning teachers may be obtained by subtracting the 28,756 elementary- and 22,231 secondary-school teachers expected to re-enter the profession (3 percent of the number of full-time teachers employed in the fall of 1965). Base Number of new teachers in demand for fall 1966 Elementary Secondary Total Trend criterion estiniate Adjusted trend criterion esriniate Quality criterion estimate 98,392 83,992 182,384 128.392 103,992 232,384 232,537 131,966 364,503 CHARACTERISTICS OF DEMAND FOR NEW TEACHERS AS SUGGESTED nv ASSIGNMENTS IN SELECTED STATES During the past 18 surveys of teacher supply and demand varying numbers of states have reported the number of new teachers employed and their assign- ments. (These include experienced teachers returning to the classroom as well as the beginning teachers.) A summary of the reports for 1965-60 from 29 states is provided in Table 15. The individual State summaries are given in the Appendix, Table B. A review of the characteristics of the teaching assignments of these new teach- ers provides an estimate of the comparative demand between elementary- and high-school levels and among the high-school subject areas. Also, the data iden- tify the types of competence needed by new teachers as suggested by the com- binations of subjects being assigned to new teachers in the high schools. Each new teacher is entered in this table only once with the entry showing the major and minor, if any, assignment. For example, the entry on line 1 and column 2 shows that 371 new teachers have been given their complete assignment in the teaching of high-school agriculture. The line shows that 9 new teachers had a major assignment in agriculture accompanied by a minor assignment in art, etc.. and that 459 new teachers had either a major or complete assignment in agriculture. Column 2 shows that 1 new teacher has been assigned a combina- tion in which art is the major assignment with agriculture being the minor as- signment, etc. Relative Demand for New Elementary- and High-School Teachers Shown in lines 21 and 22 in column 22 of Table 15 are the total numbers of new teachers employed in 196.3-66 who were given their complete or major as- signment in either elementary or high-school levels. The total demand for new elementary-school teachers was 835 greater than the total demand for new high- school teachers in these 29 states. The new elementary-school teachers rej. resented 50.5 percent of all new teachers. PAGENO="0659" TABLE 15.-il ssignments of new teachers employed in 29 States, 1965-66 Field Agricul- Art Commerce English tore (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 1. Agriculture 371 2 2. Art 1 833 6 40 3. (`oniinerce 3 2,C93 110 4. English 1 ~2 CS 5, C3 5. Foreign languages 1 6 6 310 6. Home economics 12 7 7. Industrial arts 4 6 3 3 8. Journalism 2 27 9. Library science 3 1 2 Ct 10. Matlieniatics 1 5 32 59 II. Music 3 4 4 38 12. [`hysical (`dticatioll (men) 4 U 15 13. Physical education (women) 3 8 30 14. (3eneral science 10 3 2 25 15. Biology 2 5 12 16. Chemistry 1 1 3 17. Physics -*- 18. Social studies 3 13 57 303 19. Speech 113 20. Other 1 Ct 126 21. lflgli school total 22. Elementary school ~O*-' ni,Ip at 11(1 of table, p. 1452. Foreign home Industrial Journalism languages econonucs arts (6) (7) (8) (9) 1 24 8 3 11 11 11 2 8 ~ 3 26 2 97 1,531 6 4 4 1,525 1 1 2 1,1_i 2 1 1 2) 4 `15 3 13 1 3 1 2 0 3 5 I 13 18 5 1 1 6 3 1 1 15 1(1 7 5 1 7 :2 5~ 11 4 Library science (10) 65 442 5 3 11 Mathe- matics (11) 51 56 17 30 3, 898 36 18 223 35 46 54 83 1)) Music (12) 4 2 41 6 3 9 1, 497 2 2 3 20 4 il-i- PAGENO="0660" TABLE 1r..-Assignmcnts of new teachers employed in 29 ~`taie.s, 19G5----(~o11tinue1 Total new Other teachers etiiployed l'hysical Physical education education (leneral science Field (men) (women) (1) (13) (14) (15) Agriculture 2.Art ~ ---~ 2 ~ 39 - ~ 21 27 ~ 6 3. Coiiittierce_ - 27 27 45 4. Enclisli. 5. I' reigiil~wgio~geS .~. 6. Ii(eneecol1o111ics~- -- - 2 ~ 43 4 ~ 2 ~ 13 7. Iniustrialarls 8. ,Jisrnaleiu 2 1 9. Library settee 10. Nlatheniatics. 78 6 20 3 338 6 Ii. Music Physical education (irien) 1:1. Physical education (women) 14. (}eneral scien 1,075 7 92 40 7 1, 266 25 15 91 42 2,185 189 15. 1iio1ogy~ - 16. Chemistry 17. Physics 18. Social studies 19. Speech 20. Other 1 3 277 1 21 2 62 2 9 83 40 77 1 21 21. high school total 22. Elementary school ---~ N0TE.-Based on reports from Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. Biology Chemistry Physics (16) (17) (18) 9 5 -- 10 1 1 1 2 18 6 1 3 35 59 146 39 3 21 13 1 201 72 49 431 118 39 58 157 103 23 59 58 27 1 3 19 18 19 Social studies (19) 21 104 751 94 39 32 11 94 30 204 100 66 20 3, 369 19 66 Speech (20) 6 298 10 3 3 10 5 2 28 158 41 (21) 36 179 23 41 14 54 36 3~ 20 19 112 61 2, 456 I' tTJ (22) 459 967 2, 508 7,838 1,896 1,823 1, 345 63 526 4, 868 1,628 1, 563 1, 563 3, 033 945 481 265 4, 538 373 2, 880 39, 560 40, 395 This table shows the number of persois who entered teaching positions in September 1965 who did not teach anywhere in 1964-65. Lines ito 21 show new high school teachers. The major assignment is tallied on the line and the minor assignment in the column. Line 22 shows new elementary school teachers. No person is counted twice. PAGENO="0661" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1483 The 29 states reporting assignment information for their new teachers are distributed as follows by the grouped percents of all new teachers in 1965-66 who were assigned to elementary-school grades: Number Percent of new teachers assigned to elementary grades: of 8tateS 65-69 1 60-64 1 6 50-54 9 6 40-44 4 2 Total An estimate of trends in the relative demand for new teachers between the elementary- and high-school levels is provided by information reported by the varying number of states in the earlier studies of this series. Summarized in Table 16 are the total numbers of new teachers and the percents of these teachers being assigned to elementary schools in the reporting states since 1948-49. Also shown are the total numbers of public-school teachers in the United States during these same years with the percent of all teachers who are assigned duties in the elementary schools. The information listed in column 6 of Table 16 shows a gradual reduction during the past 18 years in the proportion of all public-school teachers being assigned to elementary schools. This change is shown, also, among the percents of new teachers being assigned to elementary schools in the reporting states. The impact of the market growth in elementary-school enrollments between 1952-53 and 1957-58 is reflected in the increased percents during these years shown in column 3. The influence of the increased annual growth in secondary- school enrollments upon the demand for new teachers probably has contributed to the lower proportions of new teachers being assigned to elementary schools in recent years. The percents of all new teachers being assigned to elementary schools in the reporting states are consistently lower than the percents of all teachers in the nation being assigned to elementary schools. These differences range from 2.6 to 8.0 with a median of 5.7 percentage points. The differences tend to be slightly lower during the period of marked growth in elementary-school staff than in the earlier or following years. If conditions in the reporting states are representative of the nation, the information in Table 16 suggests that the relatively greater annual demand for new (re-entering and beginning) teachers in elementary schools than for high schools has been decreasing, and that during the past session the demand for new elementary-school teachers was not widely different from the demand for new secondary-school teachers. These data reflect demand for teachers as defined by the Trend Criterion-. the demand which has been observed in the employment of new teachers. The demand for new teachers based on the Quality Criterion during these years has consistently called for greater numbers of qualified new teachers being assigned to elementary schools than have been available for such assignment. Possibly, these proportions of new teachers being assigned to elementary schools might have been greater if the supply of qualified new teachers were equally adequate at both levels. Information in Table 26 shows that the educational qualifications of elemen- tary-school teachers have been gradually improving. Also, there is evidence that staffing ratios are improving at the elementary-school level. These data suggest that educational leaders have been following a middle road between two courses of action: (a) creation of the additional positions needed but staffing them with marginally qualified personnel, with the result that the number of teachers employed increases and the educational qualifications of the staff as a whole improve very slowly, remain constant or deteriorate; or (b) improvement of the educational qualifications of a minimum-size staff, with deferment of the creation of new positions to improve staffing ratios until the minimum standard of educational qualifications is reached among members of the existing staff. PAGENO="0662" 1484 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS TABLE 16.-Relative demand far new elementary and high school teachers in various States and percent of all public sc/toot teachers in elementary schools, since 1948-49 Reporting States All public schools Session Number Percent in Nuuibcr of Percent in of new etenieiitary Nutsshcr of States teachers elementary teachers schools, schools (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) 1948-49 36. 208 57.2 21 1887,175 64.5 1946-50 I 35.242 56.8 18 913,671 64.5 1955-51 41,793 57.7 23 tOm Alaska and 1938,268 64.4 District of Colum- bia. 1951-52 45. 658 5~9 26 plus Alaska and 962,864 64.4 I )istrict of colum- bia. 1952-53 45.859 61.4 26 1 997, 501 64.0 1953-54 58, 010 60.9 29 plus Alaska and 1,632,138 63.7 District of Colub- bia. 1954-IS 54.575 60.1 3Oplus District of 11,068,000 64.7 Columbia. 1955-56 58,257 60.6 30 plus District of 21,141,000 64.2 Columbia. 1956-57 62,099 59.9 29 plue District of 21,199,000 62.6 Cotunstñs, Itawsii, and Puerto Rico. 1957-58 62. 579 56.6 32 plus Alaska and 1,259, 000 62.4 District of Colum- tsia. 1958-59 I 59. 651 54.4 30 plus Alaska. Ha- 21,306,000 62.4 waD, District of Coluntbia, aisd Puerto Rico. 1959-60 57, 810 53.6 . 27 plus District of 2 1,355, 000 61.4 C oluustsia. 1960-61 59, 115 55.7 26 plus District of 21,405,000 60.9 (`olutsibia. 1961-62 64,753 53.1 29 plus District of 21,461,000 59.5 Colunsbia. 1962-63 53, 11.2 53.5 24 pIus District of 21,508,000 58.6 Columbia. 1963-64 18.637 51.0 22 plus District of 21,578,000 57.5 Columbia. 1964-1.5 58.948 53.0 . 27 plus District of 2 1,651, 000 57.1 Coltinsbia. 1 S-:6 79.955 , SR 5 29 31,716,285 56.4 2 Estimated front U.S. )tiicr of Educotion, loctitliTit surveys of cducatiots. 2 U.S. 1)cpart:tisrit of tls 6th, Educatiors, am! \S'e)tarc: Office of Education. Projections of educational statistics to 1974-75. 1965 edition. Circular No. 79)). Wasftington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1965: t. 30. 3 U.S. Department of health, Edoc.itiors. attd Wclf:srs; Office of Education. Fall 1965 statistics of public schools. Washington. 1)1.'.: (.ioveromrsc:rt I'rinting )ffics. 1966.; pp. 8-9. The decreasing proportion of all teachers being assigned to elementary schools and the gradual growth in the supply of potential beginning teachers (Table 22) suggest that continued improvement will be observed in 1966-67 in both the staffing ratios and tlae edueatiossmsl qualificatiotas of the elementary-school instructional staff. However, the increased levels of financial support for the creation of the additional positions needed at the elementary-school level may intensify the observable characteristics of teacher shortages by encouraging greater use of the first of the two courses of action described above. Relative Demand for New Teachers Among High-School Subjects, Adjusted Trcnd Criterion Estimate The assignments given to new high-school teachers reported in Table 15 provIde a review of the relative demand (Trend Criterion) among these subject areas. Tile high-school subjects ranked by the number of persons involved in the demand for new teachers are listed in Table 17. Also shown are projections of this dis- lrihutiOn to tise estimates of total demand based on the Adjusted Trend Criterion PAGENO="0663" Estimated demand in 1966 Jercent of new teachers eriiploy~d in For begin. For new 1955-66 ning teachers b teachers (2) (3) 19.8 16,189 12.3 10,057 (12.0) (9811) 11.5 9,403 7.7 6,296 7.2 5,887 6.3 5.151 4.8 3.925 4.6 3,761 4. 1 3, 332 4.0 3,270 1. 0 3,270 3.4 2,780 2.4 1,962 2.4 1,962 1.3 1,063 1.2 981 1.2 981 0.9 736 0.7 572 0.2 163 (4) 20, 590 12, 791 (12,479) 11,959 8, 007 7, 487 6, 551 4, 992 4. 783 4, 264 4, 160 4, 160 3, 536 2, 496 2, 496 1,352 1,248 1,248 936 728 208 Total 100.0 81, 761 103,992 Based on an estimated need for 81,761 beginning teachers being distributed nationally among the high school subjects in the same Proportions as noted in the employment of new teachers in 29 States in 1965-66. b Based on an estimated need for 10:3,002 new teachers being distributed among high school subjects nationally in the same proportions as noted in the employment of new teachers in 29 States in 1965-66. ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1485 TAII5.E 17,-Distribution, of new teachers anlo-nq high school subjects in- 29 states (`stunated -nat ir,nal adjusted trend criterion estimate of demand for new teaeher,s in high school subjects High school subjects (1) English Mathematics Total natural and physical sciences Socialstudies General science (and unspecified sciences) Other (subjects not listed) Commerce Foreign languages Home economics I Music - Physical education ~1en..: Physical education Womeu~ IndustrialarB Biology I Art Libraryscience Agriculture Chemistry Speech Physics Journalism as a means of estimating the 1966 demand for new teachers by subject areas for the nation. The Adjusted Trend Criterion estimate of demand includes the addition of ~i~,O00 high-school teachers as an outcome of the Elementary and Secondary Edu- cation Act of 196:5. Since it is not likely that these 20.000 positions are distrib- uted among tile subject areas in the same pattern as would be observed in normal staff enlargement and replacement, the estimates of clemaiid should be intei'- preted only in general terms. The estimated numbers of new teachers needed in these subject areas provide a background from w-hich the comparative numerical inlportance of subjects having a low ratio of supply to demand may be properly interpreted in coun- seling and curriculum planning. For example, a moderately low supply-demand ratio in English has far wider numerical implications than a much lower ratio in chemistry, speech, or physics. Corn bination. A8signments In a given high school the number of class sections needed In each subject and the number of sections which might be available if all teachers were assigned classes only in the subjects In which they have greatest competence and itlterest often do not occur in balance. In these situations some teachers are asked to teach In one of the deficit subject areas as a minor portion of their full assign. ments. These combination assignments are made usually for only one school year. with both the characteristics of school offerings and staff competencies changing each year. However, the size of the typical high school and the structure of its subject offerings often dictate combination assignments to teachers of subjects which have relatively few sections. For example, many schools may not have the exact number of sections in physics to provide full-time assignment of the physics teacher(s) in this subject. Where these combination patterns are observed rather widely, the expectation of teachers being assigned these combinations has implications to training programs for new teachers. PAGENO="0664" TABLE 18.-Percents of new teachers having their complete assignsnents in subject area, and major subject area combinatwn assignments, reported by 29 States Number Percent. Combinations involving about 5 perce t. or more of the nunif cr of teachers having an assignment in the subject of having ..~__ ___________ - ~ ~ teachers complete I having assign- The subject ii col. I is major The subject below is major au assign- ment ~ - mneiit iii in the the sub- subject Per- Subject Subject Per- ject cent cent Per- cent (0) (7) Subject area (1) Agriculture Art Commerce - Enghisli E~oreigii languages I Ionic economics Industrial arts home economuuicS Journahisuui. Library science Mathematics Music Health and physical edu- cation, men. health and physical edu- cation, women. General science Biology Chemistry Physics Social sciences Speech Other (4) 5. 5 8. 2 12.3 5.2 13. 8 8. 0 6. 1 9.2 5. 5 4.9 5. 1 Subject Per- Subject cent (5) General science - - Social studies - English Other - -- - Enghish~ --- ~.I ---- -- do General science Social studies -- - - - - (2) 493 1, 055 2,728 9, 155 2, 527 1,928 1,450 1,928 195 625 5, 555 1,731 2,206 1,808 4, 098 1, 415 834 633 6,201 790 3,668 (10) (3) 75-3 79. 0 76.7 61.9 55. 0 79. 1 77-7 79. 1 10.3 70.7 70. 2 86. 5 48.7 70. 0 53.3 30. 5 18.8 9. 2 54.3 20. 0 67.0 imudustrial arts l'oreigmi linguiges_ - - - - 18.6 49. 7 10. 4 (9) l~ughish English (11) Total percent being ac- counted for in these groups (12) 85.7 79. 0 76.7 75.2 85.9 79. 1 82.9 79. 5 73.8 89. 1 76. 3 86. 5 70. 5 75. 5 66.9 66. 4 90. 5 86.6 66. 4 84.9 67.0 5.4 Mathematics 13.4 General science 8.3 29.3 Other sciencesL 5.5 15.6 do 8.5 ~i4i~3~ iglist_iii.i.~ do 12.0 Socialstudies..~ SI SI SI 06 -1 w 06 C z -i SI C Chemistry Mathematics do Other 8.2 14.2 29. 8 30. 2 12. 1 37.7 Mathmatics General science Other sciences' do4 English do 7. 1 23. 1 5.2 Mathematic~~~- - do Other 1 9.3 percent chemistry, 6.3 percent general science. 16.3 percent chemistry, 7.7 percent general science, 6.2 percent biology. 112.3 percent physIcs, 10 percent general science, 7 percent 1)iology. 2 14.1 percent biology, 8.6 percent general science, 7.1 percent physics. PAGENO="0665" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1487 Table 18 provides a summary of the relative extent to which new teachers have their full assignments in the subject area, and the combination assignments noted for at least 5 percent of all persons having an assignment in a given subject area. The percents of new teachers having their complete teaching assignment in one of the listed subject areas range from 9.2 percent in physics to 86.5 percent in music. Subject areas in which new teachers are most likely to have their complete assignment in the subject include music, home economics, art, Industrial arts, and commerce. Subject areas in which teachers are least likely to be assigned full time in the subject include physics, journalism, chemistry, and speech. For example, the new physics teacher is likely to have a combination assignment which includes either mathematics or one of the other sciences. Also, the physics combination most frequently reported includes physics as a minor assignment with mathe- matics being a major subject assignment. Accuracy of data about the specific subjects within the sciences is reduced by the reporting of all sciences in the general science category by some states. TABLE 19.-Perce~it distributions of all secondary school teachers by subject area, spring 1965, a~nd of new high school teachers in selected years Subject (1) Range in estimated percent of all teachers, 1964-65 Low Per- High -1SE' cent +1SE (2) (3) (4) Percent of new teachers having complete or major assignment 1948- 1952- 1956- 1960- 49 53 57 61 (5) (6) (7) (8) 1964- 65 (9) 1965-~ 66 10 Agriculture Art Commerce English English language arts Foreign language (total) - - - Home economics Industrial arts Journalism Library science Mathematics Music Physical and health educa- tion Men Women Science (total) General science 3 Biology Chemistry Physics Social studies Speech Other (specify) Special education High school total Number of states reporting - 0.9 2.0 5.6 20.0 3.2 3.6 25.6 12.7 2.8 7.4 10.5 12.6 0.8 0.5 88.2 (~) 1.4 2.6 6.5 21.5 3.9 4.3 26.5 14.0 3.5 8.4 11.6 13.8 1.2 0.8 100.0 (~) 1.9 3.2 7.4 23.0 4.6 5.0 ~7.4 15.3 4.2 9.4 12.7 15.0 1.6 1.1 111.8 (6) 2.9 2.3 8.0 16.9 18.5 2. 5 7.7 4.7 0.2 1.3 9.3 6.8 6.8 3.6 13.0 7.0 3.1 1.5 1.4 12.6 1.4 100.0 21 2.9 1.9 9.1 17.0 18.4 2. 1 9.0 4.8 0.2 1.6 7.8 7.5 6.2 3.9 11.2 6.7 2.2 1.3 1.0 12.0 1.2 1.6 100.0 (4~ 2.0 2.4 8.1 17.0 18. 1 2. 1 7.3 4.5 0.1 1.3 9.0 6.7 6.1 4.0 10.1 6.1 2.2 1.1 0.7 11.2 1.0 7.1 100.0 (5) 1.2 2.1 6.8 19.4 20.8 4.2 5.5 3.3 0.2 1.5 12. 1 4.4 4.4 3.8 12.8 7.3 3.4 1.3 0.8 13.0 1.2 4.1 100.0 (7) 1.0 2.3 6.7 21.1 21.9 5.3 4.7 3.7 0.1 1.5 12.7 4.4 3.9 4.0 11.4 7.3 2.5 1.2 0.4 12.4 0.7 4.1 100.0 (8) 1.2 2.4 6.3 19.8 20.9 4.8 4.6 3.4 0 2 1.3 12.3 4.1 4.0 4.0 12.0 7.7 2.4 1.2 0.7 11.5 0.9 7.2 100.0 29 I Range of ±ISE allows a confidence interval of about 68 percent. 2 Includes vocational teachers. 3 Includes all sciences where not subdivided. 4Alaska and Hawaii also included, also 26 States and the District of Columbia. Hawaii and Puerto Rico also included, also 29 States and the District of Columbia. tmNationwide sample. ~26 States plus the 1)istrict of Columbia. `27 States plus the District of Columbia. Source: NEA Research Memo 1966-2. Estimated numbers of secondary school teachers in specific subject field. January 1966. The summary in column 12 of Table 18, suggests that the major assignment subjects in which new teachers having combination assignments are most likely to have widely divergent combination assignments may include biology, general science, social sciences, other subjects not listed, and physical education (men). Also, the subject areas in which the teacher is most likely to have either his full assignment or the widely observed combinations include chemistry, physics, library scieiiee, music, foreign languages, and agriculture. PAGENO="0666" 1488 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS These assignment patterns were observed when there were shortages of new teachers in mathematics. physical sciences, English, foreign languages, industrial arts. and agriculture. These shortages may have required the combination assignment of these subjects to a larger proportion of teachers than would be observed at a time when supply and demand are in better balance. Trends in Relative Demand .4mo-ng High-School Sitbjects Based on the Trend Criterion Information from a sampling survey of teachers conducted by the NEA Re- search Division in 1965-66 provides an estimate, with sampling variability, of the proportions of secondary-school teachers having their major assignment in each subject area. The annual summaries of reports from a varying number of states showing the number of new high-school teachers being employed in each major subject area provide an annual estimate of the proportion of new high- school teachers assigned to each subject area. The estimates based on these state reports reflect tile trend criterion since they include the number of positions actually filled by new teachers rather than the number needing to be filled in order to attain the minimum standards of quality in staffing characteristics. A summary of the estimated distribution of all secondary-school teachers by subject area in 1964-435 and of all new high-school teachers in the reporting states in selected years is given in Table 19. Precise comparisons of the percent distributions are not feasible owing to differences in the numbers of states reporting and the difference in the practice of counting librarians as classroom teachers. However, the general pattern of the distribution among high-school subjects for all teachers in 1964-65 and among the new teachers that session suggests that the relative demand for new teachers is almost in the same pro- portion as the total numl)er of teachers assigned among the several subject areas. The percents of new teachers assigned to a subject area are w-ithin the range of ±2 standard errors of the estimated percent of all high-school teachers in the same subject obtained from the sample survey. The percent of new teachers in 19134-65 excee(is one standard error from the estimated percent of all teachers that year only in the foreign languages. music. and social studies. Small changes in the relative demand for new teachers in high schools are suggested by information from the reporting states since 1948-49. The propor- tion of new high-school teachers has been decreasing somewhat in agriculture, home economics, industrial arts, and music. Slight increases in the proportion of new high-school teachers are noted in English, foreign languages, mathe- matics, and subjects not listed in the survey form. III. SUPPLY COMPARED WITH DEMAND FOR NEW TEACHERS Estimates of the supply of teacher education graduates prepared to enter teaching positions in 1966 and etimates of the number of teaching positions to be filled by these graduates have been presented separately in Sections I and II of this report. A cOml)arisofl of the numbers of positions included in these estimates provides a general indication of the adequacy of the present supply of beginning teachers ~nd identifies the fields of specialization in which the esti- mated number of beginning teachers in supply and demand are out of balance. Also provided in this section are estimates of the status of the current supply of beginning teachers as compared with conditions in earlier years. SUPPLY OF GRADUATES COMPARED WITH DEMAND ITCE) The iiuniher of new- teachers employed and the number of graduates of teacher J(r(I~l~rati((1l I)FO~l'aIfls a the reporting states provide an estimate of the status of till- ~upplv (onipare(l with demand based on the Trend Criterion. Tilf'rmation about the iiumber of new teachers in 1965 and their assignments reported by 29 states was summarized in Table 15 in the preceding section. The total number of new teachers and the number of pei'sons completing teacher education programs in the~e same 29 states in 1965 are listed in Table 20 in the same sub~oet groupinz. Caution should be used in analyzing the data contained in Table 20 since the number of prospective teachers being educated in a given state may not renre~ent the actual supply of beginning teachers for the state because of no~oresi1pnt graduates and rnigrat~on of resi(lent graduates. Also hinliting the ac('iiraey (of comparisons based on these figures is the possibility that experienced former teachers may be in great supply, or demand, in some sub- jects than in others. This w-ould modify the estimated relative demand for beginning teachers to fill the posithons listed as being filled by new- teachers. PAGENO="0667" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 14S9 TABLE 20.-Comparison of the total number of teacher education graduates with the number of new teachers cm plog cl in 29 States, 1965-6d Subject (1) I Total num- i Potential her of Number of supply as teacher new teachers Difference percent of education employed demand graduates (2) (3) (4) (5) Elemcntary 30,596 High school 51, 657 Agriculture 798 Art 1,776 Commerce 4,033 English 8,213 Foreign lansuages 2,372 Jtonse econonsics 3,146 Industrial arts 1,589 Journalism Library science 320 Mathematics 3.945 Music 3,038 Physical education-nsen 4,408 Physical education-women 2.148 Total natural and physical sciences 4,275 General science 1,309 Biology 2.317 Chemistry 503 Physics 146 Social studies 8.910 Speech 1,537 Other 1,1.31 40,395 -9,799 39, 560 ±12.097 459 ±339 937 ±809 2,508 ±1,525 7,838 ±371 1,896 ±476 1,823 ±1,323 1,345 S244 63 526 -213 4,868 -923 1,6?s -~-1, 410 1,563 ~-2, S45 1,563 --SsS 4,724 -449 3,033 -1,724 945 ±1,372 481 ±22 265 -119 4,536 ±4, 374 373 ±1,164 2,880 -1,799 TABLE 21.-Teacher education graduates as percent of new teachers employed in selected States, 4-year intcrrals since 1948-49 Percent of new teachers represented by number of teacher education graduates 75. 7 130.6 173.9 183. 7 160.8 104. 8 125. 1 172. 6 118. 107.9 60. 8 81. 0 186. 6 282. 0 137. 4 90. 5 43. 2 245. 2 104. 6 55. 1 196. 4 412. 1 37. 5 Level ansi subject (1) 1968-49 (2) Elementary High school, total 1952-53 1956-57 (33 (4) 1060-61 1964-65 29.7 55.6 48.0 111.7 131.7 111.4 (5) (6) 58.2 70.3 119. 1 131. 3 1965-66 (7) 75. 7 130.6 173.9 183. 7 160.8 104.8 125. 1 172. 6 118. 1 107.9 60. 80 81.0 183.6 282. 0 137. 4 104.6 55. 1 196. 4 412. 1 37.5 Agriculture 136.6 163.8 163.9 184.3 17~8 Art 117.1 264.5 139.5 154.4 165.4 Commerce 103.0 147.1 134.2 158.5 168.7 Enghsh 95.8 105.9 73.0 73.7 95.9 Foreign languages 171.1 213.3 120.1 76.1 106.6 House economics 114.6 137.9 128.3 141.7 170.6 Industrial arts 103.9 166.5 123.5 169.0 121.3 Journalisni - 103.3 82.1 78.4 59.2 93.8 Lihraryscience -- 65.5 69.6 35.0 27.9 39.1 Mathematics 73.6 108.8 58.2 73.1 79.6 Music 105.9 164.9 127.2 174.5 17t.0 Physical education (nien) 145. 1 278.9 185. 0 288. 0 283.0 Physical education (svosnen) 138.6 169.6 126.3 117.0 128.7 General science 62.3 79.4 54.8 67.8 50.7 Biology 114.8 270.9 199.3 143.1 246.2 Chemistry 135.9 200.0 107.8 107.3 112.2 Physics 65.1 120.1 80.2 79.3 119.0 Socialstudies 157.1 207.3 164.1 153.1 186.4 Speech 126.2 313.8 256.9 26~ 8 469.5 Other . 246.7 40.8 73.6 87.0 Number of States reporting 21 I 26 232 ~26 ~27 29 I Plus Alaska, Hawaii, and the District of Columbia. 2 PIus Alaska and the District of Columbia. 3 Plus the District of Columbia. PAGENO="0668" 1490 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS The information in Table 20 shows that the areas in which the supply of beginning teachers is least adequate include elementary-school teaching, high- school subjects other than those surveyed, high-school mathmematics, high- school sciences, library science, and high-school English. If the entire class of teacher education graduates in these states entered teaching, the supply of beginning teachers in these subjects would not exceed the demand for new teach- ers by as many as 15 percent. Differences in the method for reporting persons being trained in the natural and physical sciences field without specific subject endorsements and in the reporting of persons assigned specific subjects within this field make the summary of supply-demand relationships in the specific sub- jects comprising the sciences very questionable. Subjects in which the supply of teacher education graduates in these states is more than twice as great as the number of positions being filled by new teachers include physical education (men) and high-school speech. TRENDS OF SUPPLY AND DEMAND ~TCE) IN REPORTING STATES Information in Table 21 provides an estimate of trends in supply and demand conditions as observed in the reporting states since 1948-49 in four-year inter- vals. The table shows that the supply of qualified beginning elementary-school teachers has been rising toward. but has not reached, the level of demand (Trend Criterion). Mathematics, which comprises 8 to 10 percent of the new high- school teachers, also has consistently been in relatively low supply in these selected years. General science and physics, together involving about 8 per- cent of new teachers, have been in relatively short supply (the proportion in physa~s has wide variation owing to the small number of persons involved). The margin of supply of chemistry teachers has been decreasing. English, in- volving 18 to 20 percent of the new high-school teachers seems to be in better relative supply now than in earlier years, but the margin of supply is not as wide as in some other high-school subjects. Library science, involving 1 to 2 percent of the new high-school teachers, has been in relatively short supply continuously through these years studied. Industrial arts, involving between 3 and 5 percent of the new high-school teachers, has been in relatively lower supply than has been observed in earlier years. FIGFRE IV Teacher education graduates as percent of all teachers. aimually ~j~(.(O 19~-56, by level E1e~entary , ~ Secondary Percent of - ill teachers 15 10 1955- 1956- 1957- 1950- 1959- 1960- 1981- 1962- 19~3- 1984- 1965- 56 57 50 59 ~O ~L n2 63 65 15 66 PAGENO="0669" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1491 SUPPLY OF BEGINNING TEACHERS COMPARED WITH TOTAL NUMBER OF TEACHERS EMPLOYED An estimate of the present status of teacher supply and demand may be pro- vided by a comparison over several years between the number of prospective teachers being graduated and the total number of teachers employed. Allow- ance should be given to changes in the influence of annual growth of the teach- ing staff and differences in the proportion of teachers leaving the profession~ Normally the proportion of the total number of teachers represented by the number of graduates completing teacher education would not be expected to vary widely if the new supply is keeping pace with a steady enlargement of the demand for beginning teachers. Shown in Table 22 are the percents of the total number of teachers repre- sented by the number of teacher education graduates ready for entry each year since 1955-56. During these years of marked growth in the size of the total staff, the number of prospective teachers has represented a gradually increasing proportion of the total staff size. A slight moderation in this proportion oc- curred at the high-school level in 1961-62, a year having a marked increase in the growth of the secondary-school staff. SUPPLY OF NEW TEACHERS COMPARED WITH DEMAND (QCE) Two estimates of the supply of new teachers compared with the estimated demand for new teachers based on the Quality Criterion are shown on page 47: TABLE 22-Estimates of the total nunther of teachers and the number of teacher education graduates ready for employment each year since 1955-56 Elementary Secondary Teacher education grad- Teacher education grad- Session uates of previous year u ites of previous year Total Total teachers teachers Number Percent of Number Percent of total total (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) 1955-56 733, 000 37, 712 5.1 408, 000 49, 697 12.2 1956-17 751, 000 40,801 5.4 447, 000 56, 785 12.7 1957-58 786, 000 44, 029 5.6 473, 000 65, 062 13 8 1958-59 815, 000 45,318 5.3 491, 000 69, 093 14 1 1959-60 832, 000 47, 836 5.7 524, 000 71, 585 13.7 1960-61 858, 000 52, 630 6.1 550, ooo ~ 573 14. 1 1961-62 869, 000 51,866 6.0 592, 000 77. 322 13.1 1962-63 886,000 57, 854 6.5 621, 000 84. 489 13.6 1963-64 908, 000 61,979 6.8 669, 000 96,378 14.4 1964-65 940,000 72,581 7.7 709,000 101,552 14.3 1965-66 968, 000 77, 773 8.0 749, 000 112,436 15.0 Estimate, 1966-67 1,019, 000 76,304 7.5 793, 000 124, 615 15 7 H I NEA Research Division preliminary estimate plus 50.000 new teachers estimated to he added as an effect of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (adjusted trend criterion estimate). Source of staff size: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education, "Projections of Educational Statistics to 1974-75." Circular No. 790. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1961. Table 21 corrected for 1965 data (fall staff size including number of part-time teachers). PAGENO="0670" Siiiilil~ 111(1 ili9i1~i iii! !~i ii* sy rptit FIGURE V 1iL~iii1iiiig li:u-1iit~. liv live! ate! ~itl)jeU! atl~ue!til -eu] iihtiuui est lunate $&~1ANU i~j C ~. ~uJc - ~r'- -r' o - - C 0 -- - - -- - - ----`- - - - --. .~a~a.Li--aLsi -A cC NI NI NI NI A-I Cl) NI 0 C NI -i NI ci 0 C NI H U) / Eli JA304 [El ~P2IM~ / r-~-j~~!'tr}4~ -$ L~~pp PAGENO="0671" ELEMENTAPY AND SECONDAPY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1493 Number of teachers E lemeistarv Secondary Total Estimated demand (quality criterion) 232. 537 131. 555 364, 503 Estinsated supply (past practice) 1 90. 715 101, 525 195, 240 Shortage A 141.522 2~44l 169 263 Estunateci supply ~potential) 105. NO lint. 103 226,303 Shortage B 129,337 5,553 138,200 Reentry of fonncr tewhc2 aquat to 3 percent of the nul!sher of full-time teachers in fall 1965. Entry into teactnng by 51.2 pcrre t at lacier eduratioa gradnaii reared tar "ternentl!-y ocinol teachtng and by 66 percent oi teacher education gcacluah's pre~circt for inch school teaciiinc. 2 Reentry of firmer tea re equal to 4 percent of the nnin sr of tuht-tinse teachers iii fall 1965. Entry into teaclnng 1)0 85 prrcei it oh teachc- education (1)1: tee prep ird for den In t are setinal teaching and by 75 percent of teacher cducaiicn graduates treprrei I ar high schiot te sainag. Tile first estimate of tile supply of new teachers (past practice) tises the same assumptions about the levels of teacher re-entry and entry of teacher education graduates into the profession as described in Section 1. This provides an esti- naate of the number of new teachers who will be available for employment if general conditions renaain about the same as observed in recent years. The second estimate (potential supply) is based on a hypothesis that if the total QCE demand for new teachers were resulting in vacancies to be filled in the fall of 19G6, the levels of re-entry of fornaer teachers and entry of teacher educa- tion graduates may rise to higher levels than has been observcd in recent years. Evidence frons the years of critical shortage of teachers suggests tisat these changes in entry rates are not likely to occur. The two estimates show a shortage of 140,000 to 170,000 teachers with the need being critical at the elementary-school level. It is difficult to estimate the num- bers of qualified teachers who asny be available for entry in the event that schools were financially able and had the facilities to employ the 364.~00 persons estimated in the demand for new teachers. Therefore, these shortage estimates should be interpreted only in general ternas. SUPPLY COMPAREn WITH nEMAND IATCE) FOR REOPeNING TEAdHEnS A very general estinsate of the status of teacher supply anti deusand in 29 states ia 1tS3~ is provided in Tables 20 and 21. The problem of nonresident enrollments and migration has reduced the precision of estimates (If tile stmpply of begimamsing teachers for this group of states. If it is assumed that these 21) states are rep- resentative of the nation in the pattern of deasand for new teachers among the subject fields, this pattern may be used with the national estimated demand for beginning teachers to obtain a national estimate (If densand `visicis is conaparable with the isational sumsanry of the supply of beginning teachers by subject areas. Listed in Table 23 are the estimated numbers of beginning teachers who will be available for entry into classrooms this fall, and the estimated demand for beginning teachers and new teachers based on the Adjusted Trend Criterion. The estimates of demand are based on an assumption that the average rates of teacher turnover and re-entry are equally applicable anaong the subject areas. In subjects in which the rate of teacher separatioss is about average and the re-entry rate is lower than average, tise demand for beginning teachers, would he greater than the level estimated. For exaasple, the supply of qualified per- sonnel in the poo1 of former teachers nsay saot be as adequate in some subjects as us others. In the subjects having a relatively linsited supply of qualified foraser teachers the demand for beginning teachers would be increased. While precise data are not available, the linaited information about sex-related differ- ences in re-entry rates suggests that the demand for beginning teachers may be nearer the denaand for new teachers among the subject fields in \vhich issen con- stitute the predonsissant proportion of the teaching sttiff than in tlsose hi which married w-oaaen constittate the predominant PrI W0rtiola. Therefore, while the entries in column 3 of Table 23 show- the midpoint of the range of estimuate(l de- asand for beginning teachers, the actual demssasad fill- begiaaiag- teachers in somsie subjects masay deviate tow-ard the deu!amtd for new teacllers shown in column 4. -VIso, changes in tile general status of emo~(loyssseut o~tportunities for persons having the college degree may influence the turnover and re-entry mate observed PAGENO="0672" 1494 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS in earlier years. The increased availability of positions in other occupations and the higher economic rewards of many of these positions may increase the loss to the profession of teachers presently employed as well as former teachers who would ordinarily be considering re-entry into the profession. This general economic condition may increase the demand for beginning teachers toward the levels estimated as the demand for both re-entering and beginning teachers, listed in column 4 of Table 2.3. The estimates of the demand for teachers are based on the Adjusted Trend Criterion which includes the addition of 50,000 teachers expected to be employed as a result of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1985. The esti- mated 20.000 new- teachers to he added at the secondary-school level are not like- ly to he distributed among the subjects in the same proportions as have been ob- served in recent years in the assignments of new teachers. It may be more likely that larger proportions of these new teachers will be assigned duties in the English language arts, mathematics, "other" subjects, natural and physical sciences, industrial arts, homemaking, and fine arts than would be observed if the demand w-ere created by normal staff enlargement and teacher turnover. Therefore. the estimates of demand in these subjects (Table 23) may be lower than the actual conditions while the estimates in other subjects may be higher than actual conditions. TABLE 23.-Comparison ot the estimated supply of beginning teachers with the adjusted. trend criterion estimate of demand for beginning teachers and for new teachers in 1966. by level and high school~.~?Ibjeet Difference between supply and demand Estinsated demand for new teachers For beginning teachers Supply Number as per- cent of demand (4) (5) (6) 128,392 -37,677 ~103,992 +533 Level and subject 1) Elementary High school (tolal) Agriculture Art commerce English Foreign languages Itonse economics Industrial ar Journalism Library science Mathematics Music Physical education, men Physical education, j women Physical and natural sciences Social sciences Speech Other Estimated supply of beginning teachers I (2) 61, 959 82,294 643 3, 424 4. 735 14, 202 4, 894 3,812 593 7, 129 4,534 6, 187 4, 004 7.312 13, 370 2, 283 2, 166 Estimated demand for begin- ning teaclsers 2 (3) 99, 636 81, 761 981 1, 962 5, 151 16, 189 3, 925 3,761 2,780 163 L063 10, 057 3, 352 3,270 3, 270 9,811 9, 403 736 5, 887 For new teachers Supply Number! as per- cent of demand (7) (8) -66,433 48.3 -21,698 79.1 -605 s1.s +928 137.2 -1,816 72.3 -6,388 69.0 -98 98.0 -971 79.7 -609 82.8 -129 38.0 -759 43.9 -5,662 55.7 +270 196.3 +2, 027 148. 7 -156 96.3 -5, 167 58.6 +1, 411 115.8 +1,347 243.9 -5,321 28.9 1,248 2, 496 6,551 20, 590 4,992 4,783 3, 536 208 1 352 12, 791 4, 264 4, 160 4,160 12, 479 11,959 936 7, 487 62.2 100. 7 65. 5 174. 5 91. 9 87. 7 124. 7 101. 4 105. 3 48. 5 55. 8 70. 9 135. 3 189.2 122. 4 74. 5 142.2 310. 2 36. 8 -338 +1,402 -416 -1,987 +969 +51 +147 -84 -470 -2,928 +1, 182 +2, 917 +734 -2, 499 +3,967 -1-1,547 -3,721 1 n ased on an assumption that the proportions of 1965 teacher educatf on graduates entering teaching positions by Nov. 1, 1965, In the 29 reporting States will be observed nationally In 1966-67. Based on the increase in the total number of leachers to be employed in 1966-67, including the Elemen- tary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, added to an expectation that beginning leathers will be needed to fill vacancies created by the departure of 5 percent of the teachers employed in the fall of 1965 whose positions are not taken by returning former teachers. Included in these estimates is a continuation of the trends iii reduclion of the number of teachers having substandard certification or overcrowded classes, and general improvenlellt of staffing ratios. i Based on the increase in the total number of teachers to be employed in 1966-67 added to the number of vacant positions created by the departure of 8 percent of the teachers in the fall of 1965. Included in these estimates, also, is a continuation of the trends toward general improvement of staff qualifications and working conditions as observed in recent years. Estimated demand among high school subjects based on the percent distribution of new teachers assigned to these subjects in the 29 States which reported this information for 5965-66. PAGENO="0673" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1495 TABLE 24.-Summary of estimated supply coin pared wit/i t/i e adjusted trend criterion estimate of demand for beginning teachers in 1966. elementary school and high school sub feet areas by rank Estimated Numerical difference Median supply of in estinsated supply percent of beginning of beginning teacher teachers teachers and education as percent \ estimated demand graduates Level or subject area of for- entering General condition estimated _______________________ 11w demand profession for Beginning New during beginning teachers teachers the past teachers 5 years (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Elementary school 62. 2 -37,677 -66,433 82.0 Critical shortage. High school: English 87.7 -1,987 -6,388 70.9 Shortage. Mathematics 70.9 -2,928 -5.662 74.0 Do.2 Other subjects' 36.8 -3,721 -5,321 60.2 Do. Total natural and physscal sciences 74.5 -2,490 -5,617 67.1 Do.2 Co,nnierce 91.9 -416 -1,816 62.6 Low supply. Home economics 101.4 51 -971 65.2 1)o. Library science 55.8 -470 -759 4.5 1)o. Industrial arts 105.3 147 -609 e2. 2 Do.' Agriculture 65.5 -338 -605 54.1 Near balance.2 Physical education (wonsen) - - 122.4 734 -156 80. 1 Do. Journalism 48.5 -84 -129 47.7 l)o.' Foreign languages 124.7 969 -98 70.9 Do. Music 135.3 1, 182 270 20. 1 Do. Art 174.5 1,462 928 66.8 Adequate supply. Speech 310.2 1,547 1,347 61.4 Do.3 Social studies 142.2 3,967 1,411 63.6 1)o. Physical educatio'a (me") 189.2 2,917 2,027 66.3 Do.! `Where specified, other subjects include special education, guidance and cou'sseling, junior high school~ vocatio,,al subjects, distributive education, and psychology. Supply may be less adequate than shown owing to the high proportion of n,en teachers. `Should be considered in cosnhination with Englisla. The range of error in the assumptions leading to these estimates of supply and demand for beginning teachers requires tisat the numerical data be interpreted only in general terms. Therefore, the numerical differences provide only an indication of the comparative impact of supply and demand conditions in the various subject areas. A summary of the ranked placenaent of the subject areas of teacher prepara- tion in terms of the estimated condition of the stspply and demand for beginning teachers is given in Table 24. The rankhsgs are based on the isuuserical dif- ference between the estimated supply of begiuning teachers and the estimated deusand for beginning teachers and for new (beginning and re-entering) teachers. Also shown are two additional types of information which may be used to inter- pret the relative rankings. The percent of demand for beginning teachers repre- sented by the supply of beginning teachers shows the adequacy of the supply of beginning teachers if the re-entry rate of qualified former teachers were equally observed among the subject areas. The saedian proportion of qualified graduates entering the profession during the past five years provides an isnlication of the possible availability of qualified persous frossa earlier graduating classes. The size of these pools of qualified beginning teachers may be least atlequate in the subject areas having the highest proportions of graduates enterisag the profession immediately subsequent to tiseir graduation. For example, since a relatively high proportion (80.1 percent) of women graduates prepared to teach physical education typically enter the profession itnmediately following their graduation, little growth would be expected in the pool of potential beginning teachers from recent graduating classes. At the other extreme, annual enlargement of a pool of qualified potential beginning teachers is likely in journalism and in agricul- hire where about half of the gratluates typically enter the profession immediately following graduation. Tlae summary la Table 24 shows that based on the Adjusted Trend Criterion Estimate of demand the shortage of new teachers is continuing at the elementary- school level, in mathensatics. in English, and in the total natural and physical sceisaces. Also, there is a shortage of teachers isa the subject areas w-hich are becoming more widespread as instructional assignnaents 111 tise pislabr schools (ressaed ial subjects, special education, guidance and counseli tag, psychologists, 75-492--fiT-pt. 2-43 PAGENO="0674" Level and criterion for estimate (1) Elementary school: Trend criterion Adjusted trend Criterion. Quality criterion High school: Trend criterion Adjusted trend criterion. Quality criterion Total: Trend criterion Adjusted trend criterioni Quality criterion New teachers (total beginning and reentering teachers) Supply Demand Differ- ence (21 (3) (4) (5) 90, 715 98. 392 -7, 677 92. 2 90, 715 12S. 392 -37,677 70.7 90.715 232,537 _141, 822 39.0 104. 525 83, 992 +20, 533 124. 4 104, 525 103, 992 ±533 100. 5 104. 525 131. 966 -27,441 79.2 195, 240 isO, 384 -(-12, 856 107.0 195. 240 032, 3~4 -37, 144 84. 0 195, 240 364, 503 -169,263 53.6 Estimates of sul)l)ly of teuther (O1U(itti1l gra(luates exl)e('ted to ml 11(1 deniand 1 I I mi hg tea('hers. 1h(;(~-UT Nnmnr uf 200 -t- 18i -4- 10: ( ~-~ T 1:0 iLT T enter teaching 1496 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS distributive education, junior high-school subjects, etc.). Limited supply com- pared with demand is continuing in industrial arts and is observed in commerce, home economics, and library science. Local shortages may be observed in agricul- ture, womens physical education, foreign languages, and music, in which the national supply is estimated to be almost in balance with the demand. The pattern of increased demand for teachers being created by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 19G5 may make the actual demand for new teachers greater than the estimated levels in several subject areas. TARI.E 25.-Comparison of time csttmated supply of new and beginning teach er~ tnt/i tim nec estimates of demand Beginning teachers Supply as per- cent of demand Supply Demand Differ- ence (6) (7) (8) 61,959 69,636 -7,677 61,959 61,959 99,636 203,781 -37,677 i_141,822 82,294 61,761 +20, 533 82. 294 81,761 +533 82, 294 109, 735 -27,441 ±12,856 -37, 144 144,253 144,253 131,397 181, 397 144,253 313,516 -169,263 Supply as per- cent of demand (9) 89. 0 62.2 30. 4 133.3 100. 7 75.0 109.8 79.5 46. 0 FIGtRE -i-I SECONDARY - lug ,har- yin:::: iLfiLy ~ Adist- .Achiese trends meet uf minimum nrccen t trends quality years fur ESEA in staff- ing char. DEMAND tcCS PAGENO="0675" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATIOX AMENDMENTS 1497 SUMMARY OF COMPARISONS BETWEEN ESTIMATES OF `J'F:ACIIER SFI'PLY AND I)EMANI) Table 2~ sunnllarizes the comparisons between the estimated supply of new teachers and the three estima tes of deniaiid for new teachers. The esi imated supply of new elelllelltary-s(II)oI I eachers is lower than each of the I hree esti- mates of deuiani. The estiiiiii I 0(1 total suppiy ot ne~v high-school teachers is about equal to the demand projected by Trend Criterion estimate and the Adjuste(l Trend Criterini e~t1iiiate. but is iilaiTe(luii to to meet the require- ments of the Quality Criterion estimate. iIu~vever, shortages are observec1 in English, matIwinlti(s. subjects not listed on the survey forms, and in the total fields of natural ~ln(i physical sciences. Lu\v supply is noted in coninierce, home economics. library science. amid industrial arts. I ateusificatiomi of short- ages in sonic of these fields and creation of shortages iii the fine arts may result from the Elemnent:ii'y a mid Secondary Educ:i tion Act of 1 tR~. Chairman PE1IKTXS. Who is our next witness this morn inc- Mr. LABASSI. Mv name is Peter Libassi. i aiii Special Assistant to the Secretary of hEW for Civil Ri~lits. Chairman I~r1tKrNs. Who is in elu~~e of I lie \vorki11~ clown there Are von working oh the gil i(Iel ines? Mi. T~ilI\5sT. Yes, -ic: I am tite (`bid A(l\isei 10 tL~ Seciet:irv c)f the Department on overall policies including the school guidelines. Chairman PEERIN5. lfltIO(lIIUe the other l)eopie at the table with you. Mr. I~iit~s~j. On iiiv left is Mis. Ru! (V Mart II \Vi1O iS the Special Assistant for Education in the Office of the Seimetaiv, Mr. T)errick Bell who is time Deputy Special Asse-tant fur ( ~ivil R i~lits to the Secretary, and Mr. Ed wa 1(1 V)u naa Ii, e A i~t a a ( nc.al Counsel for Civil Rights in tile Department. Chairman PERKINS. As clmaii'nian of time onhini~ tee I will lecogmi ize that the. House Conmin ittee on the J udieial\- iris time prihhiarv mespon- sibilitv and jurisdiction in time area of civil iights but neveithieless I am quite cognizant of the fact that so mitany i\ien~bers in the house of Representatives ale concerned about the a (1111 iii ist tat ion of the pro- gram in that area, just how the guiclel lies are \vomkimlu at the present time, the number of school districts in (erta iii Southern States that have not taken advantage of the pio~i:tiii iiiidei tItle I because of the guidelines and at the saimie tulie I ant quite cogmiizaiit of the court decisions. I would certainly like for the Office of Education to give us an anal- ysis of the school districts that are not benefiting and whether the States are in your judgment going along with the guidelines and if not to what extent, and if they are failing to cooperate. I would like to get this data in the record because I personally feel that by and large the Office of Education has done an excellent job in working with the States in connection with the administration of title I and that the States have cooperated to a wonderful degree iii taking advantage of these programs. I think we should get in the record the exact studies and just what these guidelines are at the present time. PAGENO="0676" 1498 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS STATEMENT OF F. PETER LIBASSI, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE SECRETARY OF HEW FOR CIVIL RIGHTS, ACCOMPANIED BY MRS. RUBY MARTIN, SPECIAL ASSISTANT FOR EDUCATION; DERRICK BELL, DEPUTY SPECIAL ASSISTANT FOR CIVIL RIGHTS; AND EDWARD YOURMAN, GENERAL COUNSEL FOR CIVIL RIGHTS Mr. Lii~sssi. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate this opportunity to be of any assistance to the com- mittee and to discuss the administration of title VI of the Civil Rights Act. As you indicated not only the Judiciary Committee but the Rules Committee also held hearings on the operation of the school guidelines. The provision of the school desegregation policy which are of great- est importance to the desegregation of schools are the requirements that the freedom of choice plans operate fairly and effectively to achieve desegregation and that faculties be assigned without regard to race or color. Chairman PERKINS. Will you in your testimony somewhere insert an exact copy of the guidelines at the Preselit time and make it a Part of your statement? Mr. LIBASSI. Yes, sir. (The document referred to follows:) REVISED STATEMENT OF PoLIcIEs FOR SCHOOL DESEGREGATION PLANS UNDER TITLE VI OF THE CIvn~ RIGHTS ACT OF 1964 DECEMBER 1966 (As Amended for the School Year 196T-68) STBPART A-APPLICABILITY OF THIS STATEMENT OF POLICIES § 181.1 Title VI and the HEW Regulation Section 601 of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides that: "No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be sub- jected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance." As required by Section 602 of Title VI, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare has issued a Regulation to assure the elimination of discrimination in Federal aid programs it administers. The HEW Regulation was published as Part 80 of Title 45, Code of Federal Regulations (45 CFR Part 80). § 181.2 Compliance by School Systems Eliminating Dual School Structure To be eligible for Federal aid, a school system must act to eliminate any practices in violation of Title VI, including the continued maintenance of a dual structure of separate schools for students of different races. The HEW Regulation recognizes two methods of meeting this requirement: (1) a desegregation order of a Federal court; or ~2) a voluntary desegregation plan. § 181.3 Purpose of This Statement of Policies This Statement of Policies applies to public elementary and secondary school systems undergoing desegregation to eliminate a dual school structure. It sets forth the requirements which voluntary desegregation plans must meet for the Commissioner to determine under the hEW Regulation that a plan is ade- quate to accomplish the purposes of Title VI. This Statement supersedes tile "General Statement of Policies Under Title VI of tile Civil Rights Act of 1964 Respecting Desegregation of Elementary and Secondary Schools," issued in PAGENO="0677" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1499 April 1965 and Published as 45 CFR I'art 181, and has been amended further to make it applicable to the school year 1967-U8. § 181.4 Initial Demonstration of Compliance To be eligible for Federal aid, a school system must first assure the Com- missioner that it will comply with Title VI and the HEW Regulation. It must submit the form of assurance that meets its circumstances, under §~ 181.5, 181.6, or 1S1.7 below. § 181.5 Systems Without Dual School Structure (a) Submission of Form 441. A school system which does not maintain any characteristic of a dual school structure may initially demonstrate compliance by submitting HEW Form 441. This is an assurance of full and immediate com- pliance with Title VI. (b) Resubmission Not Required. A school system which has appropriately submitted HEW Form 441 need not submit a new copy with subsequent requests for Federal aid, but need oniy affirm when requested that the assistance sub- mitted continues in effect. (c) Supplementation of Assurance. The Commissioner may require supple- mentation of HEW Form 441 when he has reasonable cause to believe that there is a failure to comply with any provision of Title VI or the HEW Regulation. § 181.6 Systems Under Federal Court Order for Desegregation (a) Submission of Order. A school system under a Federal court desegrega- tion order which meets the requirements of the HEW Regulation may submit, as evidence of compliance with Title VI. a copy of the court order, together with an assurance that it will comply with the order, including any future modi- fication. (b) Resubmission Not Required. A school system under a court order ac- cepted by the Commissioner need not submit another copy, but must submit any modification not previously submitted. Re r isio~i of (`0 tOt 01(1(1's. A s('llOol system under a court order for desegregation which is not in accord with current judicial standards is subject to legal action by the Department of Justice, or by the parties to the original suit, to modify the order to meet current standards. § 181.7 Systems With Voluntary Desegregation Plans (a) Submission of Form 447-B. A school system with a voluntary desegrega- tion plan nmust provide an assurance that it will abme by the applicable require- ments for such plans contained in this Statement of Policies. Such assurance may be given by submitting I-JEW Form 441-B to the Commissioner. Commit- ments of funds for new activities are subject to deferral, as provided by law, for school systems with voluntary desegregation plans which have failed to submit HEW Form 441-B. (b) Resubniission Not Required. A school system which has appropriately submitted HEW Form 441-B need not submit a new copy with subsequent requests for Federal aid. hut need only affirm when requested that the assurance submitted continues in effect. (c) Changing Type of Plan. A school system may change from one type of desegregation plan to another if such action would eliminate segregation and all other forms of discrimination more expeditiously. A school system planning to change the type of its plan must submit a new plan meeting the requirements of this Statement of Policies, together with HEW Form 441-B. for a determination by the Commissioner as to the adequacy of the plan to aec'onhl)lish the purposes of Title VI. (d) Retaining Present Type of Plan. A school system with a desegregation plan accepted by the Commissioner need not resubmit its plan if it intends to continue under the same type of plan. If a plan accepted by the Commissioner fails to n~eet any requirement under this Staten~nt of Policies, the submission of HEW Form 441-B will be deemed to amend the plan so that it will meet such require- ment. Amendments to the plan are not to be submitted unless requested. How- ever, certain supporting materials must be submitted, as provided in Subparts B, C. and D below. (e) Initial Submittal of Plans. If no desegregation plan has been submitted or accepted for a school system, HEW Form 441-B and a plan meeting the re- quirements of this Statement of Policies must be suhmitted. PAGENO="0678" 1500 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS {~ 181.8 through 181.10 reserved] SUBPART B-BASIC REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL VOLTNTARY DESEGREGATION PLANS § 181.11 Various Types of Desegregation Plans It is the responsibility of a school system to adopt and implement a desegrega- tion plan which will eliminate the dual school system and all other forms of dis- crimination as expeditiously as possible. No single type of plan is appropriate for all school systems. In some cases, the most expeditious means of desegrega- timi is to close the schools originally established for students of one race, par- ticularly where they are small and inadequate, aiid to assign all the students and teachers to desegregated schools. Another appropriate method is to reorganize the grade structure of schools originally established for students of different races so that these schools are fully utilized, on a desegregated basis, although each school contains fewer grades. In some cases desegregation is accomplished by the establishment of lion-racial attendance zones. Under certain conditions, a plan based on free choice of schools may be a way to undertake desegregation. In certain cases the pm.~)oses of Title VI may be most expeditiously accomplished by a plan applying two or more of the foregoing procedures to certain schools or different grade levels. Based on consideration of all the circumstances of a par- ticular school system, the Commissioner may determine that its desegregation plan is not adequate to accomplish the purposes of Title VI, in which case he may require the adoption of an alternative plan. In any case where the State educa- tion agency is pursuing policies and programs for expediting the elimination of the dual school structure, the Commissioner will consider this factor in deter- mining whether a particular type of plan is adequate for any given school system in such State. § 18L12 Student Assignment Practices Title VI precludes a school system from any action or inaction designed to perpetuate or promote segregation or any other form of discrimination, or to limit desegregation or maintain what is essentially a dual school structure. Any educational opportunity offered by a school system must he available to students without regard to race, color, or national origin. In particular, any academic tests or other procedures used in assigning students to schools, grades, class- rooms. sections. ci'ur~e~ of Stuily or r any other purpo~'s must be applied 11111- fornily to all students without regard to race, color, or national origin. Cur- riculum. credit and promotion procedures must not be applied in such a way as to penalize or hamper students who transfer from one school to another pursuant to a desegregation plan. § 181.13 Faculty and Staff (a) Deseqreqation of ~taft. The racial composition of the professional staff of a school system, and of the schools in the system, must be considered in de- termining whether students are subjected to discrimination in educational pro- grains. Each school system is responsible for correcting the effects of all past discriminatory practices in tl1e assignment of teachers and other professional staff. (h Vcir Assiqnmrnt.~. Race. color, or national origin may not be a factor in the hiring or assignment to schools or within schools of teachers and other pro- fessional staff, including student teachers and staff serving two or more schools, except to correct the effects of past discriminatory assignments. (c) Dismissals. Teachers and other professional staff may not he dismissed. demoted. or passed over for retention, promotion. oi' rehiring, on the ground of race, color, or national origin. In any instance where one or more teachers or other professional staff members are to he displaced as a result of desegregation. no staff vacancy in the school system may he filled through recruitment from outside the system unless the school officials can show that no such displaced staff member is qualified to fill the vacancy. If as a result of desegregation, there is to he a reduction in the total professional staff of the school system. the qualifications of all staff members in the system must he evaluated in selecting the staff ii~cnibers to he released. T~'.~t .~~`i,ii~e f's. The nattern of assiznnient of teachers nail other pro- fess~''~a' ~~a4'5 ~ ~ip~ scPoo1~ of i system m~y not hi' such th.9t `1(n~1 Plo ~ inm"naeul for ~t~i'en5s i'f ~ porfPoilnr r.'l cc', c 1fl5, or PAGENO="0679" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTJCATION AMENDMENTS 1501 national origin, or such that teachers or other professional staff of a particular race are concentrated in those schools where all, or the majority, of the students are of that race. Each school system has a positive duty to make staff assign- ments and reassignments necessary to eliminate past discriminatory assignment patterns. Staff desegregation for the 1967-C8 school year must include signifi- cant progress beyond what was accomplished for the 196(3-67 school year in the desegregation of teachers assigned to schools on a regular full-time basis. Pat- terns of staff assignment to initiate staff desegregation might inc'lu(le, for exam- pie: (1) Some desegregation of professional staff in each school iii the system, (2) the assignment of a significant portion of the professional stall of each race to particular schools in the system where their race is a minority and where special staff training programs are established to help with the process of staff desegregation, (3) the assignment of a significant 1)ortiou of the staff on a desegregated basis to those schools in which the student body is desegregated, (4) the reassignment of the staff of schools being closed to other schools in the system where their mace is a minority, or (;5) an alternative pattern of assign- ment which will make comparable progress in bringing about staff desegregation successfully. § 181.14 Services, Facilities, Activities, and Programs (a) General. Each school system is responsible for renloving segregation and any other form of discrimination affecting students in connection with all services, facilities, activities and programs (including transportation, athletics. and other extra-curricular activities) that may be conducted or sponsored by or affiliated with the schools of the system. (b) ~Spcci~c ~Situations. (1) A student attending school for tile fist time on a desegregated basis may not be subject to any disqualification or waiting period for participation in activi- ties and programs, including athletics, which might otherwise apply because he is a transfer student. (2) If transportation services are furnished, sponsored or utilized by a school system, dual oi' segregated transportation systems and any other form of dis- crimination must be eliminated. Routing an(l scheduling of transportation iiiust be planned on the basis of such factors as economy and efficiency, a iid may not operate to impede desegregation. Routes and schedules must be (hanged to the extent necessary to comiiply with this provision. (:1) All selmool-ielii ted use f athletic fields, meeting rooms, and all other school- related services, facilities, activities, and programs. such as commencement exercises and parent-teacher meetings, winch are open to persons other than enrolled students. must be open to all such persons and must be (`oll(lUcte(l with- out segregation or any other forum of (lisI'i'imiflatiOil. 4) All special educational progranis. such as l)re-schOol. suiimnitr school and adult education, and any educational program newly instituted, must be conducted w-ithout segregation or any other foi'm of discrimination. Free choice desegrega- tion procedures normally may not be applied to such programs. § 181.15 Unequal Educational Programs and Facilities In addition to time changes not de lii student assigmimimeiit pra (`to es ufl(lei' its desegregation plan. ea('h school system is responsible for reiiioving all other f rams of discrimination Oil tile gi'ouiid of race. (`0101'. or national rigin. For exanll)le, some school systems still maintain 5111011. inadequate schools that were originally established for students of a partic'nlam' race and are still used prmarily 01' exclusively for the education of students of such race. If the facilities, teaching materials, or educational program available to students in such a school are inferior to those generally available in the s('liools of the systeni. the school authorities will normally be required immediately to assign such students to other schools in order to discontinue the use of the inferior school. § 181.16 Attendance Outside School System of Residence No arrangement may he made nor permi~ion granted for students residing iii One school system to attend school in another school system Iii any ease (1) where the result w-ould tend to limit desegregation or maIntain what is essentially a dual school structure in either system, or (2 where such attendance is not ave lIe hie to all students wj ft cut m'c~a ri tt i-n cc, (`1 r. r no ti n:ml on rio. PAGENO="0680" 1502 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTATION AMENDMENTS § 181.17 Official Support for Desegregation Plan (a) Community Support. School officials must take steps to encourage com- munity support and acceptance of their desegregation plan. They are responsible for preparing students, teachers and all other personnel, and the community in general, for the successful desegregation of the school system. bi Information to the Public. Full information concerning the desegregation plan must be furnished freely to the public and to all television and radio stations and all newspapers serving the community. Copies of all reports on student and staff assignments required under § 1S1.18 below must be available for public inspection at the office of the Superintendent of the school system. (c) Protection of Person Affected. Each school system is responsible for the effective iniplenientation of its desegregation plan. Within their authority, school officials are responsible for the protection of persons exercising rights under, or otherwise affected by, the plan. They must take appropriate action with regard to any student or staff member w'ho interferes with the successful operation of the plan, whether or not on school grounds. If officials of the school system are not able to provide sufficient protection. they must seek whatever assistance is necessary from other appropriate officials. § 181.18 Reports (a) Ai~tieipated Enrollment. By April 15 of each year, or by 15 days after the close of the choice period in the case of plans based on free choice of schools, each school system must report to the Commissioner the anticipated student en- rollment, by race, color, or national origin, and by grade of each school, for the following school year. Any subsequent substantial change in anticipated enroll- ment affecting desegregation must he reported promptly to the Conimissinner. (b) Planned Staff Assignments. By April 15 of each year. each school sys- tem must report to the Commissioner the planned assignments of professional staff to each school for the following year, by race, color, or national origin and by grade. or where appropriate, by subject taught or position held. Any subsequent change in planned staff assignments affecting staff desegregation must be reported promptly to the Commissioner. Ic) Actual Data. As soon as possible after the opening of its schools in the fall, but in any case within 30 days thereafter, each school system must deter- mine and promptly report to the Commissioner the actual data for the items covered in the reports called for under (a) and (b) above. (d) Attendance Outside System of Residence. The reports called for under (a) and (c) above must include a statement covering (1) all students who reside within the boundaries of the school system but attend school in another system, and (2) all students who reside outside but attend a school within the system. This statement must set forth, for each group of students included in (1) and (2) above, the number of students, by race, color, or national origin, by grade, by school and school systen1 attended. and by school system of residence. (e) Consolidation or Litigation. A school system which is to undergo con- solidation with another system or any other change in its boundaries, or which is involved in any litigation affecting desegregation, must promptly report the relevant facts and circumstances to the Commissioner. (f) Other Reports. The Commissioner may require a school system to sub- mit other reports relating to it~ compliance with Title VI. § 181.19 Records A school system must keep available for not less than three years all records relating to personnel actions. transportation, including routes and schedules, and student assignments and transfers, including all choice forms and transfer applications submitted to the school system. The Commissioner may require retention for a longer period in individual cases. Iii 181.20 through 181.30 reserved] SLBPART C-ADDITIONAL REQIIREMENTS FOR VOLL~NTARY 1)ESEGREGATION PLANS BASED ON GEOGRAPhIC ATTENDANCE ZONES § 181.31 General A voluntary desegregation plan based in whole or in part on geographic attend- ance zones must meet the requirements of this Subpart for all students whose assignment to schools is determined by such zones. The general requirement PAGENO="0681" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTCATION AMENDMENTS 1503 for desegregation plans set forth elsewhere in this Statement of Policies are also applicable. § 181.32 Attendance Zones A single system of non-racial attendance zones must be established. A school system may not use zone boundaries or feeder patterns designed to perpetuate or promote segregation, or to limit desegregation or maintain what is essentially a dual school structure. A school system planning (1) to desegregate certain grades by means of geographic attendance zones and other grades by means of free choice of schools, or (2) to include more than one school of the same level in one or more attendance zones and to offer free choice of all schools within such zones, niust show that such an arrangement will most expeditiously elimi- nate segregation and all other forms of discrimination. In any such case, the procedures followed for the offer, exercise and administration of free choice of schools must conform to the provisions of Subpart D below. § 181.33 Assignment to School in Zone of Residence Regardless of any previous attendance at another school, each student must be- assigned to the school serving his zone of residence, aiid may he transferred to another school only in those cases which meet the following requirements: (a) Trensfer for Special i\ecds. A student who requires a course of study not offered at the school serving his zone, or who is physically handicapped. may be permitted, upon his written application, to transfer to another school which is designed to fit, or offers courses for, his special needs. b ) jim only Transfer Policy. A school systeiii may 1) permit any student to transfer from a school where students (if his race are a majwitv to any other school, within the system, where students of his race are a minority, or (2) assign students on such basis. (c) Special Plan Prot-isions. A student who specifically qualifies to attend another school pursuant to the provisions of a desegregation plan accepted by the Commissioner may be permitted. upon his written application, to transfer to such other school. § 181.34 -Notice a) Ind~ci(luai Notice. On a convenient date between March 1 and April 30 in each year. each school system must distribute, by lirst class mail, a letter to the parent, or other adult person acting as parent. if each student who is then en- rolled. except high school seniors expected to gra(luate. giving the nanie and ben- tion of the school to which the student has been assigned for the coming school year pursuant to the desegregation plan, and information concerning the bus service between his school and his neighborhood. All these letters must he mailed on the same day. Each letter must be accompanied by a notice, in a form pre- scribed by the Commissioner, explaining the desegregation plan. The same letter and notice must also be furnished, in person or by mail, to the parent of each prospective student, including each student planning to enter the first grade or kindergarten, as soon as the school system learns that he plans to enroll. (ii) Pu b1i.~1, cd Notice. The school system must arrange for the conspicuous publication of an announcement, identical with the text of the notice provided for under (a) above, in the newspaper most generally circulated in the community, on or shortly before the date of mailing under (a) above. Publication as a legal notice is not sufficient. Whenever any revision of attendance zones is proposed, the school system must similarly arrange for the conspicuous publication of an announcement at least 30 days before any change is to become effective. naming each school to be affected and describing the proposed new zones. Copies of all material published hereunder must also be given at that time to all television and radio stations serving the community. [~ 181.36 through 181.40 reserved] SUBPART D-ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR VOLUNTARY DESEGREGATION PLANS BASED ON FREE CHOICE OF SCHOOLS § 181.41 General A vountary desegregation plan based in whole or in part on free choice of schools must meet the requirements of this Subpart for all students whose assignment to schools is determined by free choice. The general requirements. for desegregation plans set forth elsewhere in this Statement of Policies are- also applicable. PAGENO="0682" 1504 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLCATION AMENDMENTS § 181.42 Who May Exercise Choice A choice of schools may be exercised by a parent or other adult person serving as the student's parent. A student may exercise his own choice if he (1) is exercising a choice for the ninth or a higher grade, or (2) has reached the age of fifteen at the time of the exercise of choice. Such a choice by a student is controlling unless a different choice is exercised for him by his parent, or other adult person acting as his parent. during the period in which the student exer- cises his choice. Each reference in this Subpart to a student exercising a choice means the exercise of the choice by a parent or such other adult, or by the stu- dent himself, as may he appropriate under this provision. § 181.43 Annual Mandatory Exercise of Choice Each student must be required to exercise a free choice of schools once annually. A student may not he enrolled or assigned to a school without exer- cising his choice, except as provided in § 181.45 below. § 181.44 Choice Period A period of at least 30 days must be provided for exercising choice, to com- mence no earlier than January 1 and to end no later than April 30. preceding the school year for which choice is to be exercised. The Commissioner may require an additional period or different dates for a particiular school system. No preference in school assignment may be given on the basis of an early exer- cise of choice during the choice period. § 181.45 Failure To Exercise Choice A failure to exercise a choice within the choice period does not excuse a student from exercising his choice, which may be done at any time before he commences school for the year with respect to which the choice applies. How- ever, any such late choice must be subordinated to the choices of students who exercised choice during the choice period. If by a week after school opens there is any student who has not yet exerciSe(1 his choice of school, he must be assigned to the school nearest his home where space is available. Standards for deter- milling available space must be applied uniformly throughout the system. § IS1.4fi Letters to Parents, Notices, and Choice Forms (a) Mailings. On the first day of the choice period, each school system must distribute, by first class mail, a letter. an explanatory notice, and a choice form, to the parent or other adult person acting as parent of each student who is then enrolled, except high schc)ol seniors expected to graduate, together with a re- turn envelope ad(lressed to the Superintendent. The texts for the letter, notice, and choice form to he used must be in a form prescribed by the Commissioner. (b E.rtra Copies'. Extra copies of the letter. the notice. and the choice form must be freely available to parents. students, prospective students and the general public, at each school in the system and at the office of the Superintendent. (`) Maps Am'ailahle to Public. A sireet or road map showing the boundaries of. and the school serving, each attendance zone must be freely available for public inspection at the office of the Superintendent. Each school in the system must have freely available for public inspection a map showing the boundaries of its attendance area. § 181.35 Reports a A tten dance Zones. The report submitted under § 181.18 (a ) by April i:i of each year mu4 be accomplished by a map, which must show the name and location of each school fi~'ihity planned to be used during the coming school year, the atten(lance zones fr each schrul in effect (luring the current school year, and any changes in the attendance zones planned for the coming school year. Tile mai' need lilt he of professional quality. A clipping of each news- pa per announcement a ml any map published under § 181.34 (b) or (c) above must he sent to the CoIamissi `ner within three (lays after publication and, in the case of prolosed revisions. iiiust lie accompanied by data showing the esti- mated change iii attendance, by race. color, or national origin and by grade, and in the racial composition of the professional staff, at each school to be a ffeeted. hI ;ltteIOlal(1 ()ut.~i:lc Zone of Residence. Whenever a student is permitted tI (teal a ~`hi 1 other than that serving his zone of residence, and whenever 1 ri. (`~Zt II IF 51(1 tIer] 1:i ace is denied, the school system must retain records PAGENO="0683" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1505 showing (1) the school and grade applied for, (2) tile zone of the student's residence and his grade therein. (3) the race, color, or national origin of the student, (4) the reason stated for the request, and ( I the reason the request is granted or denied. Whenever the total iiumber of transfers permitted from any school exceeds two percent of the student enrollment at that school, the relevant facts must 1)0 reported l)ronlptly to the Commissioner. (C) Content of Choice Form. Unless otherwise authorized or required by the Commissioner, each choice form, as prelared by tile school system for dis- tribution (1) must set forth the name and location of, and tile grade offered at each school and (2) may inquire of the person exercising the cilOice only the name, address, and age of the student, the school and grade currently or most recently attended by the student, the school chosen, the signature of one par- ent or other adult person serving as parent or, where appropriate under ~ 181.42 above, the signature of the student, and the identity of the person signing. If necessary to provide information require(I by §1 181.18 and 181.19 above, or for other reports required by the Commissioner, the choice form may also ask the race, color, or national origin of the student. No statement of reasons for a par- ticular choice, or any other information, or any witness or other authentication, may be required or requested. No other choice form, including any pupil place- ment law form may be used by the school system in connection with the choice of a school. Id) Return of Choice Form. At the option of the person completing the choice form, it may be returned by mail or by hand to ally school in the school system or to the office of the Superintendent. (e Choices 2'~ot on Official Form. Exercise of choice may also be made by the submission in like manner of any other writing which sufficiently identifies the student and indicates that he has made a choice of a school. § 181.47 Prospective Students Each prospective student, including each student planning to enter the first gi'ade or kindergarten, must be required to exercise a free choice of schools be- fore enrollment. Each such student must be furnished a copy of the prescribed letter, notice, and choice form, by mail or in person. on the date the choice period opens or as soon thereafter as the school system learns that he plans to enroll. Each must be given an opportunity to exercise his choice during the choice period. A prospective student exercising his choice after the choice period must be given at least one week to do so. § 181.38 Choice May Not Be Changed Once a choice has been submitted, it may not be changed for the school year to which it applies, whether (luring the choice period, after the choice period, or during that school year, except on request (1) in cases meeting the conditions set forth ill § 1s1.50 below, (2) in cast' of a change of residence to a place where another school serving the student's grade level is closer than the school to which he is assigned under these provisions, and (3) in case of a conìpelling hardship. A student who cannot enter the school of his choice because the grade he is to enter is not offered at that school must be promptly notified as soon as this is known and must be given the same opportunity to choose another school as is ln'ovided a prospective student under ~ Th1.-IT above. § 181.49 Assignment According to Choice No choice may be denied in assigning students to schools for any reason other than overcrowding. Iii cases where )vel'cm'ow(ling would result at 0110 or more schools fi'oin the choices made, preference must be given ii the basis of the proNilalty if schools to tile homes of studemits. \VitlloUt i'ege r(l to iace, color, or national Iriglil. No preference may he given to Stll(leiits fni' lmi~m' attendance at a 5('ho(l if such I)refcrence \V)li Id doily them' stfl(lflts their fi'ee (`ill i('O Of schools under the plami. In costs where this i rivisi mi \V( mid i'esul I ill uhimisiial difficulty mv lying, fin' instamice, students mt eing a hle In tini slì t (ii' 5(11 1' yea 1' ill a pa iticula r sch ml, or students being uiia ide I a ttemi or Ia I ui iii I her niemniei's of the same fa muily. or at a school iniving special courses iequ mmcl by a student, the relevant facts may he brought to the attention of tile Coiiiiiiis~ionei' for con- sicleration of alternative i~roeedures. Any student ~vli SO tin 1(0 is denied un(ler these l)rovisions must he notified in wmiting promptly ii 11(1 given his c'hni('e of each school ill the system serving I is gre 10 level \vlmr(' roe is voile lie. Standards for determining overerowdina a ml ave liable sloe' that are applied PAGENO="0684" 1506 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS uniformly throughout the system must be used if any choice is to be denied. Each student and his parent, or other adult person acting as parent, must be notified in writing of the name and location of the school to which the student is assigned hereunder promptly upon completion of processing his first or any second choice. A school system may, at its option, give preference to any stu- dent whose choice is for a school at which students of his race are a minority. § 181.50 Transfers for Special Needs Each student must attend the school to which he is assigned under the fore- going provisions, except that any student who requires a course of study not offered at that school, or who is physically handicapped, may be permitted, upon his written application, to transfer to another school w-hich is designed to fit, or offers courses for, his special needs. § 181.51 No Limitation of Choice; Transportation No factor, such as a requirement for health or birth records. academic or phy- sical examinations, the operation of the school transportation system, or any other factor except overcrowding. may limit or affect the assignment of students to schools on the basis of their choices. Where transportation is generally pro- vided. buses must he routed to the maximum extent feasible SO as to serve each student choosing any school in the system. In any event, every student choos- ing either the formerly white or the formerly Negro school (or other school es- tablished for students of a particular race, color, or national origin) nearest his resi(lence must he transported to the school to which he is assigned under these provisions, whether or not it is his first choice, if that school is sufficiently dis- tant from his home to inak-e him eligible fifi' transportation under generally ap- plical le tra lisp rtatioii rules. § 181.52 Officials Not To Influence Choice No official, teacher, or employee of the school system may require or request any student or prospective student to submit a choice form during the choice period other than by the prescribed letter, notice, and choice form. After the choice period, the school system must make all reasonable efforts to obtain a completed choice form from any student who has not exercised a choice. How- ever, at no time may any official, teacher, or employee of the school system, either directly or indirectly, seek to influence any parent, student. or any other person involved, in the exercise of a choice, or favor or penalize any person because of a choice made. Information concerning choices made by individual students or schools to w-hich they are assigned may not be made public. § 181.5.3 Public Notice on or shortly before the date the choice period opens, the school system must arrange for the conspicuous publication of a notice describing the desegregation plan in the newspaper most generally circulated in the conimunity. The text of the notice must be in a form prescribed by the Commissioner. Publication as a legal notice is not sufficient. Copies of this notice must also l)e given at that time to all radio and television stations serving the community. Any other announcement published by the school system concerning enrollment, such as might be made in connection with scheduling pre-enroliment procedures for prospective first grade students. must (1) state clearly that under the desegregation plan a choice of school is required for each student whose choice has riot yet been exercised, (2) describe and state where copies of the prescribed letter, notice and choice form may be freely obtained in person, or by letter or telcphone request, and (3) state the period during which the choice may be exercised. § 181.54 Requirements for Effectiveness of Free Choice Plans A free choice plan tends to place the burden of desegregation on Negro or other minority group students and their parents. Even when school authorities undertake good faith efforts to assure its fair operation, the very nature of a free choice plan and the effect of longstanding community attitudes often tend to preclude or inhibit the exercise of a truly free choice by or for minority group students. For these reasons, the Commissioner will scrutinize with special care the operation of voluntary plans of desegregation in school systems which have adopted free choice plans. PAGENO="0685" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1507 In determining whether a free choice plan is operating fairly and effectively, so as to materially further the orderly achievement of desegregation, the Com- missioner will take into account such factors as community support for the plan, the efforts of the school system to eliminate the identifiability of schools on the basis of race, color, or national origin by virtue of the composition of staff or other factors, and the progress actually made in eliminating past discrimina- tion and segregation. The single most substantial indication as to whether a free choice plan is actually working to eliminate the dual school structure is the extent to which Negro or other minority group students have in fact transferred from segregated schools. Thus, when substantial desegregation actually occurs under a free choice plan, there is strong evidence that the plan is operating effectively and fairly, and is currently acceptable as a means of meeting legal requirements. Conversely, where a free choice plan results in little or no actual desegregation, or where, having already produced some degree of desegregation, it does not result in substantial progress, there is reason to believe that the plan is not operating effectively and may not be an appropriate or acceptable method of meeting constitutional and statutory requirements. As a general matter, for the 1967-68 school year the Commissioner will, in the absence of other evidence to the contrary, assume that a free choice plan is a viable and effective means of canpieting initial stages of desegregation in school systems in which a substantial percentage of the students have in fact been transferred from segregated schools. Where a small degree of desegrega- tion has been achieved and, on the basis of the free choice registration held in early 1967, it appears that there will not be a substantial increase iii desegrega- tion for the 1967-68 school year, the Commissioner will review the working of the plan and will normally require school officials to take additional actions as a prerequisite to continued use of a free choice plan, even as an interim device. In districts with a sizable percentage of Negro or other minority group stu- dents, the Commissioner will, in general, be guided by the following criteria in scheduling free choice plans for review: (1) If a significant percentage of the students, such as 8 percent or 9 percent, transferred from segregated schools for the 1966-67 school year, total transfers on the order of at least twice that percentage would normally be expected. (2) If a smaller percentage of the students, such as 4 percent or 5 percent, transferred from segregated schools for the 1966-67 school year, a substantial increase in transfers would normally l)e expected, such as would bring the total to at least triple the percentage for the 1966-67 school year. (3) If a lower percentage of students transferred for the 1966-67 school year, then the rate of increase in total transfers for the 1967-68 school year would normally be expected to be proportionately greater than under (2) above. Where there is substantial deviation from these expectations, and the Com- missioner concludes, on the basis of the choices actually made and other avail- able evidence, that the plan is not operating fairly, or is not effective to meet constitutional and statutory requirements, he will require the school system to take additional steps to further desegregation. Such additional steps may include, for example, reopening of the choice period, additional meetings with parents and civic groups, further arrangements with State or local officials to limit opportunities for intimidation, and other further community preparation. Where schools are still identifiable on the basis of staff composition as intended for students of a 1)articular race, color, or national origin, such steps must in any such case include substantial further changes in staffing patterns to eliminate such identifiability. If the Commissioner concludes that such steps would be ineffective, or if they fail to remedy the defects in the operation of any free choice plan, he may require the school system to adopt a different type of desegregation plan. § 181.55 Reports (a) 8npporting Materials. Each school systemmi must submimit to the Commis- sioner a copy of the letter, notice, and choice form, all as prepared by the school system for distribution, within three days after their first (listI'ihution, and must submit a clipping of all newspaper announcements pul)lishel in accordance with § 181.53 above within three days after publication. (b) Data on Choices Not Being Honored. In any case including the ease of conflicting choices under § 181.42 above, where a student chooses a school where PAGENO="0686" 150S ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDECATION AMENDMENTS he would he in racial minority, and (1) he is to be assigned to a school where he would be in a racial majority, or 2) the school system proposes not to proc- ess his choice for any reason, the relevant facts must be reported promptly to the Conimissiofler. (c) Tran~fcrs for Special Needs. Wherever a student is permitted1, under fl 181.45 or 181.50 above, to attend a school other than the school to which he is or wOUl(l lie assigned under the other applicable provisions hereof, and whenever a request for such attefi(laIlce is denied. the school system iiiust retain records showing (1) the school and grade applied for, (2) the school an(l grade to be transferred from. (3 the race. color, or national origin of the student. (4) the rea~on ~.tated for the request. and 31 the reason the request is granted or denied. Whenever the total iiumber of transfers permitted from any school exceed~ two percent of the student enrollment at that school, the relevant facts must be reported promptly to the Commissioner. [~ lsl.36 through 151.60 reserved] SUBPART E_MmscEi,LANE0LS PROVISIONS § ISI.61 How To Submit Reports Each report to the Commissioner required under this Statement of Policies must l)e sent by first class mail addressed to the Equal Educational Opportunities Program. ES. Office of Education. Washington, D.C., 20202. § 181.62 Alternative Administrative Procedures If an a(lmiflisti'ative procedure provide(l for under this Statement of Policies is not administratively feasible in a particular situation, the Commissioner may accept an alternative procedure if he determines that it will accomplish the same purpose. § 181.63 Revision of Statement of Policies The Commissioner may modify this Statement of Policies as may be necessary to accOml)lish the purposes of Title VI. § 181.64 Copies of Documents for State Agencies Each school system submitting any plan form or report to the Commissioner under this Statement of Policies must also submit a copy of such form oi' report to the appropriate State education agency. § 181.65 Definitions As used in this part, (a ( The tern! "Commissioner" means the E.S. Commissioner of Education or any official acting under assignment or delegation from him to carry out any of his functions under this Statement of Policies. (b) The term "discrimination" means discrimination on the ground of race, color, or national origin. (c) The term "dual school structure" means a system of separate school facili- ties for students based on race, color, or national origin. (dl The term "FlEW Form 441" means the printed document provided for the use of certain school systems by the ES. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. entitled "Assurance of Compliance with the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare Regulation under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 19(14." (e( The term `HEW Form 441-B" immeans the printe(l document. provided for the use of certain school systems by the ES. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare entitled "Assurance of (`ompliance with the Revised Statement of Policies for School Desegregation Plans Ender Title Vi of the Civil Rights Act of 1964." (f 1 The term "HEW Regulation" means the Regulation issued pursuant to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 10C4 by the ES. Department of Health. l~du- cation, and Welfare (Part SO, of Title 45, Code of Federal Regulations(. (g) The term "parent" means an adult individual who exercises parental con- trol over, or is otherwise acting as parent of, a student or prospective student. Ii The term `school official" shall include, hut is not limited to, any person who serves c)n the governing hoard of a school system. or attends meetings of such hoard in an official capacity. and all administrative and supervisory person- nel of a school system. PAGENO="0687" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1509 (i) The term "school system" means, as the context may require, either (1) a legally constituted school authority ( such as a local board of ethication) which has a(Iministrative control of one or niore elementary or secondary schools, (2) the geographic area over which any such school authority has athninistrative con- trol for school purposes, or (3) the schools and facilities over which any such school authority has administrative control. (j) The term `Statement of Policies" means this Revised Statement of Pol- icies for School Desegregation Plans under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1904. (k-l The terni "Title VT" means Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (PL 88-352,42 USC 2000(1 to 2000d-4). [~ 181.00 to 181.70 reserved] Mr. Liw~ssi. On both of these issues the I)epartment has been advised by its General Counsel and by the Department. of Justice thai the policies of the Office of Educatioii are fully consistent, with and supported by title VT of tile Civil Rights Act and the decisions of the Federal court. Iii essence the policies of the Department permit a district to initiate the desegregation of its schools by offering the children a choice of schools. The method of student. assignment which has been traditional in most. parts of the country has been assigning children to neighbor- hood schools on the basis of geographic attendance zones. This method takes 110 a(count of the preference of the student and niav well result in his assignment to a school against his expressed wish. The assignment. of students to a partidulai' school on the basis of the~ student's choice has in the main been an innovation adopted in connection w-itli the desegregation of schools that, have previously been segregated on the basis of race. It has been accepted as a permissible means of desegregation but courts have made it clear that. it can be used only if it is effective in abolishing the racial dual school system. Where community hostilities or other pressure preclude a truly free choice, then some other method must be used in converting to a non- racial system. In some it. has been the system of this Department that the free choice is permissible as a method of desegregation only if it is effective in eliminating the dual system based on race. If it is not effective than an alternative method of assigning children to particular schools not based on the choice of the students or their parents must he adopted. With respect~ to faculty the I)epartment of ,Justice has advised that title VI not only permits the Department to require faculty desegrega- ion but obliges the Department to do so as a condition for the continued receipt of Federal funds. The position of the Department. is consistent with the rulings of the Federal court including the Supreme Court. Furthermore, every effort has been made to assure, that these policies are administered fairly and objectively. School districts are scheduled for review based on a district's ow-n report. of the extent of actual student and faculty desegregation. In August of 1966 the Commissioner notified the State education agencies that it would be the policy of the Office. to review the districts with the poorest performance first. Approximately 250 schools were- school districts w-ere in this category. At the same time the Commis- PAGENO="0688" 1510 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS sioner stated that another 400 districts that had made progress would be scheduled for review during the school year. These 100 districts were urged to take steps on their own to improve the extent of student and faculty desegregation. The largest number of districts between 700 and 800 were notified that their performance was adequate and no review of their plans would be undertaken. The committee should know that generally the 250 school districts that were first reviewed, those with the poorest performance, had no student. desegregation or less than 2 percent of the Negro students in formerly white schools and no faculty desegregation. In addition many districts had denied choices of the Negro students to attend the white schools, they had discouraged Negro students from choosing a white school, parents had been intimidated, the school dis- tric.t had failed to make efforts to prepare the community for desegre- gation and had not followed the guideline vital to its success. Recently the Department administrative hearings parents testified of night riders shooting into their homes, that insurance on their homes was canceled for no apparent reason after they enrolled in white schools and their children as well as themselves had been har- rassed and threatened. They spoke of losing their jobs, their credit, and sometimes their homes when they chose a white school. The transcript of these hearings gives a more vivid picture of com- munity attitudes than anything I might say. During field review where progress is not sufficient to carry out the efforts of title VI, renewed efforts, voluntary efforts, implicit in this duty, in this respon- sibility is a duty to make suggestions and recommendations to school districts of steps that they might take in order to proceed with school desegregation and the effort is made to tailor the suggestions and rec- ommendations to meet the problems of each particular district. For example, where a district must bus its white or Negro students on the basis of their work to a neighboring school district to be edu- cated, it would be recommended that this practice cease and all the children be educated in their home district. The courts have rectuired districts to take such action even prior to the Supreme Court's decision of 1954. Where districts are still oper- ating small and adequate segregated schools for Negroes, it has been recommended that these schools be closed and that the students and teachers be reassigned on a nonracial basis. The courts have simply required the closing of small inadequate Negro schools. We would not be carrying out the spirit of title VI if we did not suggest to school districts what steps they could take to meet their obligations. Districts are urged to come up with their own plans if all recommendations appear inappropriate to them. Over 600 desegregation plans have been reviewed for the current school year. As of now approximately 100 of these plans have been found ineffective to eliminate the dual school system. In approxT- matelv one-fourth of these districts there is absolutely no desegrega- tion of any description. All students and faculty continue to attend schools traditionally serving their race. Recommendations of the staff were rejected by these districts which also refused to sbumit alternative desegregation plans. The Depart- PAGENO="0689" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDVCATIOX AMENDMENTS 1511 ment was left with no alternative but to offer these districts an oppor- tunity for a hearing. Chairman PERKINS. As a whole do you have a breakdown of where those districts are situated? Mr. LIBASSI. Yes. Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Would you make that available for the record, please? (The document referred to follows:) Stfltistical summary on title VI administrative enforcement actions by the department for the 1966-67 school year (under the revised guidelines) Total school districts in the nation 24, 539 School districts in 17 southern and border states 4, 942 School districts operating under voluntary desegregation plans 1, 813 School districts subject to enforcement actions as of March 1967 173 DISTRICTS SUBJECT TO ENFORCEMENT CONSTITUTE Total school districts in the Nation (percent) 07 School districts in southern and border states (percent) 3.5 School districts operating under voluntary desegregation plans (per- cent) 9. 5 TOTAL ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS FOR THE 1965-07 SCHOOL YEAR AND BASIS FOR ENFORCEMENT ACTION School districts failed to file the requisite assurance (441B) 55 School districts filed assurances invalid on its face 35 School districts-Commissioner of Education had reasonable grounds to believe the assurance was untrue or not being honored 83 Total final terminations 1965 thru 1967 (districts) 135 1 The total number of final terminations is 52; however, fund eligibility has been restored to approximately 17 distrIcts by way of court ordered desegregation plans. Mr. LIlL~ssr. In maiiy communities throughout the South school officials and community leaders have made substantial progress toward the elimination of dual school systems. Despite the difficulties con- nected with the operation of free choice plans, there ate instances where they have worked effectively to desegregate schools. Tue key to success is the willingness of local school officials and opinion leaders to develop an atmosphere that will lead to significant progress. In addition to the ~00 or 800 districts that were advised last fall that they had made satisfactory progress and were in corn- ph~tnce with title VI, other districts whose performance was in- adequate have negotiated additional desegregation steps which brought them into compliance. For instance, one Georgia district has operated two segregated schools, one for Negro students, and Negro teachers, and the other for white students with white teachers. However, this district has now agreed to transfer the entire Negro eighth-grade class to the white school in September of 196~ and to assign three full-time teachers across racial lines. As a result 10 percent of the Negro students in the district will be attending desegregated schools next year. This case was recently the subject of a column by Mr. Eugene Patterson, the editor of the Atlantia Constitution, and with the permission of the chairman I would like to submit a copy of that column to be inserted in the record at this point. T5-492-67-pt. 2-44 PAGENO="0690" 1512 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Chairman PERKINS. Without objection it is so ordered. (The document referred to follows:) [Atlanta Constitution, March 10, 1907] SCHOOLS GET A YEAR'S GRACE While remaining firm, the U.S. Office of Education is embarking on a more conciliatory approach to encourage desegregation of lagging Georgia schools. For one thing, letters to state departments of education are in the works, inviting the states to assume more responsibilities in effecting the guidelines. Federal funds will be offered to finance increased state activity. (I)f iiiore immediate significance, however, will he a notification that one Georgia county is about to get from Washington. This decision, which has already been made, will signal a major adjustment in fund cutoff policy by the Office of Education. The Georgia county in question still has segregated schools. New federal funds have been withheld from it during the current school year, pending a permanent fund (`utotr hearing scheduled to be held shortly. Many Georgia counties are in this shape, so they will be interested to know what is about to happen. In return for a firma commitment volunteered by the county school system that it will under take significant desegregation beginning next September, the Office of Education is post polling the fund cutoff hearing until next September, and is additionally releasing to the schools all of the federal funds that have been with- held from them this year. In short, a school system that has been cited as not obeying the law up to now, but which decides to comply during the next school year, may retrieve the current year's funds it has lost and delay its fund cutoff hearing by simply spelling out its intentions for the future. The intentions will have to be spelled out; the Office of Education is not accept- ing vague promises. The county whose funds are about to be restored laid down a detailed plan for student and faculty desegregation, affecting some 10 per cent of its Negro studciits. But tile significance of the new federal decision lies in its show of conciliation. Counties tium t have done nothing to comply with the guidelines heretofore are not to be consigned ruthlessly to the outer darkness; if they want to come back into the light they'll be welcomed and helped to catch up with the other school sys- tenis, with their past lag written off. Tile emphasis has thus been turned more decisively to encouraging compliance rather thami terniinatiiig funds. Those reluctant schools that choose to do that which they liiive not yet (10110 are offered financial forgiveness for their past omissions. Justice department lawsuits impend for the outright defiant, of course, so that ultimately they will he desegregated by court order if not by the Office of Educa- ti on's new encouragement. But the new policy of conciliation in place of punishment offers a way out of the woods for those Georgia school systems wishing to take it. Mr. Liin~ssi. Thus far 50 districts which were inadequate, last year or iii is year anti had to be cited for fund termination of hearings have conte. into ("OmpllaiI('e. In other words, Mr. Chairman, where we had notified these disti'icts for hearing they have taken action even after they were notified for hearing and after we terminated the hearing iroc ess. \lan other districts which would be cited for hearings took addi- tional corrective measurements and thus came into compliance and voluntarily. Every effort will be continued to he macic to encourage di~zti'iets to follow this course of action. Thus far there are only 35 school (Lstl'i(ts in the entire TThitecl States that have had final orders terniinatin~ Federal funds issued against them. While w~ must face the fact. that SS percent of the Negro children in ii ~outhei'u States continue to attend schools whose students are PAGENO="0691" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1513 all or nearly all Negro, it is nevertheless the fact that since the adop- t1on and implementation of title VI of the Civil Rights Act, the num- ber of Negro students attending desegregated schools has increased markedly. In 1964. it was 2.25 percent of the Negro students in desegregated schools. In 1965 it was 6 percent and in September 1966 it was 12 percent. The progress in the six border States is even more impres- sive with the dual school system nearly abolished in some. In addition, more than half of the districts of the South have made at least a start in faculty desegregation. The object. of the Depart- ment's civil rights activity is not the termination of Federal funds. Our goal is to assure that no person in the united States on the grounds of race, color or national origin be excluded from participation in or he subject-ed to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. Mr. Chairman. I have two documents which I would like to sul)mit for the committee's informal ion and for the record. One is a memo- randum from the General Counsel on the legal basis of the revised guidelines. The second is a letter from the Attorney General stating the need to require faculty desegregation. Chairman PERKINS. Without objection all of those ilocuinents will be inserted in the record at this point. (The documents referred to follow:) MEMORANDU~,1 ~\OVEMBER 29. 1960. To: The Secretary. From : Alanson W. Willcox, General Counsel. Subject: Review of Legal Authority for the 19136 School Desegregation Guidelines. Pursuant to your recent request, I have reviewed the legal authority for the Revised Statement of Policies for School Desegregation Plans (the "Guidelines) and my earlier advice to you concerning the legal authority for it. I have completed this review, and I unhesitantly reaffirm my advice that the 1966 Guidelines are fully consistent with and supported by title VI ot the ( `ivil Rights Act of 1964 and the decisions of Federal courts. In addition to the analysis of court decisions in my memorandum of March 7, 1966, to Commissioner FIowe. the pertinent decisions are ilisius~ed in a statement entitled "Authority for the 1966 School I )esegreg~itioii Ouideliiies.~' That state- ment served as an attachment to a letter of May 24. 1900. from I'ommissjollel Howe to Senator Fuibright. More recently the Courts ot Appeals for the Fourth a iid Fifth Circuits have handed down (1ec sions iii Thu ccP 1 V. 1)u i-li (1 ni C iti~ It 0(1 rd of Education (No. 10.460, C.A. 4th, July 5, 19001 and Doris v. Boqid of ~ehool Coniniissioners of Mobile Counti,' (No. 22,759. CA. 5th. August Ill, 19601. These reaffirm principles upon which the Guidelines are baseil. l,all itulai'lv the fart that teacher desegregation is an essential part of the desegregation 1)lans. Fur- ther, in the Mobile case, the Court pointed out as one of the principal legal defects in the plan there under review "the fact that even as to those grades which, under the plan, have actually become `desegregated' there is no true substance in the alleged desegregation. Less than two-tenths of one per cent of the Negro children in the system are attending white schools." The Deputy Attorney General recently submitted to Congiessiiian Tiow-ard W. Smith. Chairman of the House Rules Committee, a letter requested by him re~arding faculty desegregation. The Chairman ha'l asked whether this Department has authority, under title VI of the Civil 1Uci~t~ Act of 1964. to require a school district maintaining a dual school system to desegregate its faculty as a necessary part of desegregating its school system. The Department of Justice responded with a letter dated October 4, 1900, and an attachment cit- PAGENO="0692" 1514 ELEMENTAI~Y AND SECuNDAi~Y EDLCATIOX AMENDMENTS iii~ ~`uaerous judicial decisions in which the courts had required school districts, ~it at school desegregation plans, to cease hiring and assigning faculty on the lask of race and in many cases to assign teachers for the express purpose 01 overeollIllig the effects of past discrimination. The letter concluded with the toll `wing sentence : "For the foregoing reasons we conclude that section 001 I Of the Civil Rights Act of 1904] applies to the desegregation of faculty and staff at shi ci systems that have beeii racially segregated, and that section 004 [of the 4 `i': ii Rights Act of 1964] does not preclude such application." It should he noted. on the other hand, that the Report of the Senate Committee `n AlIrpriations (pp. 71 and 72. Report No. 1031. 89th Cong., 2c1 Sess.) ques- tiinei whether the Guidelines are consistent with legislative intent on the ground that they allegedly require assignment of pupils in order to overcome racial iiiilalance. The Committee apparently felt that the definition of "desegregation" in section 401(b) of the Act, and the provision of section 407(a) which provides that `nothing herein shall empower any court or official to require the transporta- tion of students to overcome racial imbalance." were intended to be applicable to actions under title `VI and that the Guidelines required action to overcome such hiiihalance. We are satisfied that the Guidelines do not require action "to overcome racial inihalance." It should be noted, however, that section 402 specifies that the definitions it contains arc "[a]s used in this title" [IV], and also that title VI does hot contain the defined word `desegregation" or the word "desegregate." It is therefore difficult to conceive of a court holding that, as a legal matter, the title TV definition is controlling in title VI. Moreover, the context of the quoted lanruage in section 407(a) indicates that it concerns only desegregation actions brought by the Attorney General, and not the refusal or termination of Federal finaii'ial assistance under title VI. The Senate Appropriations Committee Renort. however, is based upon statements made by Senator Humphrey in response to questions asked by Senator Byrd of West Virginia. Some time ago my staff prepared a statement showing that an examination of the colloquy in context demonstrates that Senator Humphrey was not re- ferring to requirements applicable to school districts which have been main- taining dual school structures, but only to what would be imposed in de facto situations which courts have held not to violate the constitutional rights of stu- dents. In fact, Senator Humphrey emphasized that the provision in question siml)lY embodied the substance of Bell v. School City of Gary, 324 F. 2d 209 (C.A. 7th. ( 1963), cert. den. 377 U.S. 924). (110 Cong. Rec. 12715-12717, June 4, 19~4) The Guidelines are consistent with Senator Humphrey's explanation because he made clear at that time that the amendment did not prevent action "for the purpose of preventing denial of equal protection of the laws." [i.e., a violation of the children~s rights under the Fourteenth Amendment]. (110 Cong. Rec. 12714. June 4, 1964) The Guidelines do not require more for the continuance of Federal assistance than a plan looking toward the elimination of the dual school system as required by the Fourteenth Amendment. These requirements are discussed in my memorandum of March 7, 1966. and the attachment to Commissioner Howe's let- ter of May 24, 1966, to Senator Fulbright. The performance provisions of which the Senate Appropriation Committee report i'~ oritical do no more than follow constitutional requirements. They l)rov~ie that for the school year 1966-07 a school district may comply with title VI through operation of a choice plan under which schools continue to be main- tained for Negroes. But if in practice such plans are not making progress to- ward the elimination of the dual school system, the Commissioner may require that the school officials take further action to make progress or may require a different type of plan such as geographic zoning (45 C.F.R. 181.54). Where a school district assigns children to schools on the basis of non-gerrymandered geographic zoning, the effectiveness test referred to above does not apply. Obviously, a school system which has adopted a free choice desegregation plan, but which is making little or no progress in the elimination of its dual school ~v~iem. is not satisfying its constitutional obligation, as defined by the decisions of the Federal courts, to desegregate its schools. Just as obviously, the Com- missioner of Education would not be satisfying his obligation under title VI and the Regulation if he were to determine that such a plan is adequate to carry out the purposes of title VI. The percentages stated in the Guidelines do not provide a rigid rule for the degree of progress required of each school district. They do, however, provide PAGENO="0693" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY I:DFCATION AMENDMENTS 1515 a guide to the Office of Education in determining whether or not a free choice plan should be scheduled for review and a guide to the school district as to what, in general, might be considered reasonable progress. In this same sec- tion, there is an indication of what might be done in the event there is a sub- stantial deviation from these expectations. Any school district which believes it is being asked to do more than the law requires has full recourse to an administrative proceeding and a thirty-day iioti- ficatiou to Congessional committees before a termination of Federal assistance (se('. 1i02. Civil Rights Act of liffl4). Moreover, if it believes the termination to exceed the Commissioner's authority under the law, it is entitled to judicial review as provided in section 603. In short, the decisions of the Federal courts establish that local school officials who have in the past maintained separate schools for Negro and white children are under a constitutional compulsion to provide a single desegregated school system for all children. At no time did the Congress intend in title IV or else- where in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that any school child receive less than his full measure of constitutional protection. The responsibility which school of- ficials who are desegregating their school systems voluntarily must assume in order to qualify for Federal assistance may not, if the purposes of title VI are to he carried out. be any less than the responsibilities imposed on school officials by the courts in recent school desegregation decisions. The Guidelines were issued to inform school officials of what those responsibilities are and are in accord with those decisions. If school systems assuming a lesser degree of responsi- bility were permitted to receive Federal assistance, the purposes of title VI would be thwarted. MARCH 2, 1967. Hon. RUSSELL B. LONG, Chairman, Finance Committee, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR LONG: During the course of Secretary Gardner's testimony before your Committee on February 23, 1967, you raised the question whether the Supreme Court's decision in the Brown case requires the desegregation of a public school faculty in which teachers have previously been assigned on a racial basis as part of a dual racial public school system. You asked that this Department furnish the Committee a memorandum discussing the case law in this area. The case law, I believe, clearly imposes on public school authorities the affirmative, constitutional duty to desegregate their faculties so that the rights of pupils to the "equal protection of the laws" under the Fourteenth Amendment will no longer be denied. In 1954 the Supreme Court of the United States declared that the segregation of public school students according to race violates the Fourteenth Amendment. Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954). A year later, the Court. in determining how judicial relief could best he fashioned, mentioned the problem of reallocating staff as one of the reasons for permitting the desegregation process to proceed w-ith "all deliberate speed." Brown v. Board of Education, 349 U.S. 294. 301 (1955). Two cases decided by the Supreme Court in late 1965 indicate that school boards may no longer postpone the responsibility owed their students of de- segregating faculty. In Bradley V. School Board of Richmond, Virginia, 382 U.S. 103 (1965), the Court took the view that faculty segregation had a direct impact on a desegregation plan, and that it was improper for the trial court to approve a desegregation plan without inquiring into the matter of faculty seg- regation. In reaching this conclusion the Court. in a unanimous opinion, com- mented that "there is no merit to the suggestion that the relation between faculty allocation on an alleged racial basis and the adequacy of the desegrega- tion plans is entirely speculative." And in ruling that there should be no further delay in a hearing on the question of faculty desegregation, the Court further emphasized that `delays in desegregation of school systems are no longer tol- erable." 382 U.S. at 10~. In Rogers v. Paul. 382 U.S. 198 (1tlG~), the Supreme Court extended the un- delayed right to challenge teacher segregation to students who had not yet themselves been affected by the School Board's gradual desegregation plan. The Court stated (382 U.S. at 200) "Twn theories would give students not yet in desegregated grades sufficient interest to challenge racial allocation of faculty: (1) that racial allocation of PAGENO="0694" 1516 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS faculty denies them equality of educational opportunity without regard to segre- gation of pupils; and (2) that it renders inadequate an otherwise constitutional pupil (lesegregation plan soon to be applied to their grades." Relaying on the Bradley case, the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, the circuit covering the states of Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas, ruled in January 1960, in a suit also brought by Negro students, that it was `essential" that the plan of desegregation for Jackson, Mississippi "provide an adequate start toward elimination of race as a basis for the employ- ment and allocation of teachers, administrators, and other personnel," Singleton. V. Jackson Municipal Separate School District, 3~i5 F. 2d 865, 870. And in a case decided in August 1966, the same Court ruled that the plan of desegregation for Mobile. Alabama `must be modified in order that there be an end to the present policy ~f hiring and assigning teachers according to race by the time the last of the schools are fully desegregated for the school year 196T-6~." Davis V. Board of Sc/tool Commissioners of Mobile County, 364 F. 2d 896, 904. The Courts of Appeal for the Fourth Circuit (Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina. Virginia and West Virginia), the Eighth Circuit ( Arkansas, Iowa. Minnes ta. Miss un. ~\ehr;l sk::. Nt rth I)a kota a 11(1 St tuth Pa kt tta and the Teiith Circuit Col r:du. Kansas, New Mexico. Oklahoma. Utah and Wyo- ming) have similarly held. Iii a suit brought by pupils in Durhatim, North Car lina. the Court sta tod "\V read the R,u/lcu] (leciSioli as authority for the proposition that re- mova I of race considerations front faculty selection and allocation is, as a miiatter of 1;iw. an inseparable and indispensable command within the abolition of pupil segregation in l)ubhic schools as pronounced in Brown v. Board of Education, supra. 347. U.S. 4S3. Hence no proof of the relationship between faculty allocation and pupil assignuient was required here. The only factual issue is whether race was a factor entering into the employment and place- mnent of teachers.' WI ce/er v. Durham City Board of Education, 363 F. 2d 738,740 (C. A.4, 1900. The Court in Whccler went on to require (at p. 741) "\acaiit teacher :ositins in the future ... should be opened to all appli- camits. and each tilled by the best qualilied applicants regardless of race. More- over. the order sh uld eiicuurage transfers at the next session by present mnem- bers of the faculty to schools in which pupils are wholly or pre(lonhinantly of a race otner than such teacher's. A number of the faculty members have ex- pressed a willingness to do so. Comimbined with the employment of new teachers regardless if race. this procedure will, within a reasonable time, effect the desegregati(n f the faculty.' (ham /cIx v. henderson ri/ic I/raid of Education, 304 F. 2d ISO CX. 4. 1900), itivolved the iroldeni cf Negn teachers whit list their jobs when an all Negro S('hool was :iIOliShe(l. The School Boa id treated theni as new applicants. The Court held I Ito t this was discriminatory and invalid under the Fourteenth Aiiiendmnent, stating itt l~. 1~i2) "First. the nitimalate of Browit v. Board of Elucation, 347 U.S. 453 (1954), forbids the censideratiomi of race in faculty selection just as it forbids it in pupil placeatent. See Wh cc/cr v. D uthint City Board of Education, 340 F. 2d 70~t. 773 4 Cir. IftO'i . Thus the reduction in the number of Negro pupils did not justify a corresponding reduc't mu in the number of Negro teachers. Era i: kliim v. Co ii n t!/ Boar! of Ui/ca Count!~. 300 F. 2d 325 ( 4 Cir. 190(i) . Sec- ond the Negro school teachers were public euiiployees who could not he ills- criitiiuiated against on account of their race with respect to their retention in the system. .Johnson v. Branch, 364 F. 2d 177 (4 Cir. 1966), and cases therein cited In ti stilt hrought by pupils in El Dorado, Arkansas. the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals recognized `the VaIi(lity of the plaintiffs complaint regarding the School] Pa rd's failure to integrate the teaching staff. Such discrimination is preserile1 lv Rroucn and also the Civil Rights Act of 1904 and the regulation promulrate(1 thereunder.' Kent p v. Beasley. 352 F. 2(1 14. 22 1905). The Court elaborated on this theme in Sin ith v. Board of Education of Marrilton, 365 F. 2d 770. 775 19001 ``Tt is our tinni e ulusion that the reach of the Brown decisions, although they specifically concerned only pupil discrimination, clearly extends to the proscription of the employment and assignment of public school teachers on a PAGENO="0695" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1517 racial basis. Cf. United Pvblic Workers v. Mitchell, 330 U.S. 75, 100 (1947) Wieman v. Updcgraff, 344 U.S. 183, 191-192 (1952). See Colorado Anti-Di&. crimination Comin'n v. Continental Air Lines, Inc., 372, U.S. 714. 721 (1963) This is particularly evident from the Supreme Court's I)OSitive indications that non-discriminatory allocation of faculty is indispensable to the validity of a desegregation plan. Bradley v. School Board of time City of Richmond, supra; Rogers v. Paul, supra. This court has already said, `Such discriniiiiation [fail- ure to integrate the teaching staff] is prescribed by Brown and also the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the regulations promulgated thereunder.' " Kemp v. Brown, supra, p. 22 of 352 F. 2d. In a recent decision of the Eighth Circuit, Clark v. Board of Education of Little Rock School District, No. 18, 368 (December 15, 1966), the Court required of the Little Rock. Arkansas School Board (slip op., p. 15) a `positive pro- gram aimed at ending in the near future the segregation of the teaching and operating staff." The Court stated (slip 01)., p. 13) `We agree that faculty segregation encourages pupil segregation and is detri- mental to achieving a constitutionally required non-racially operated school system. It is clear that the Board may not continue to operate a segregated teaching staff. Bradley v. School Board of City of Richmond, 382 U.S. 103 (1965). . . . It is also clear that the time for delay is past. The desegrega- tion of the teaching staff should have begun many years ago. At this point the Board is going to have to take accelerated and J)Ositive action to end dis- criminatory practices in staff assignment and recruitment." The Court then proceeded to outline the essential ingredients which such "action" must include (pp. 13-14) "First, . . . future employment, assignment, transfer, and discharge of teachers must be free from racial consideration. Two, should the desegrega- tion process cause the closing of schools employing individuals predominately of one race, the displaced personnel should, at the very minimum, be absorbed into vacancies appearing in the system. Smith v. Board of Education of Morril- ton Sc/i ooi District, No. 32. supra. Third. whemiever possible. requests of indi- vidual staff members to transfer illt() mmiinority si tuatioims should lie honored by the Board. Finally, we believe the Board imiake all a(lditional l)ositive commit- ments necessary to bring about some measure of racial balance in the staffs of the individual schools in the very near future. The age old distinction of `white schools' and `Negro schools' must be erased. The continuation of such distinctions only perpetrates inequality of educational opportunity and J)laces in jeopardy the effective future operation of the entire `freedom of choice' type plan." In a suit brought by pupils in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit recently affirmed a lower court order requiring that by 1970 "there should he the same percentage of iion-white teachers in each school as there now is in the system." Board of Education of Oklahoma City Public Schools, Independent District No. 89 v. Dowrll, No. 8523 (January 23. 1967), slip op., p. 22, affirming, 244 F. SupI). 971, 977-978 (W.D. Oh-la. 19(35). The District Court had stated (p. 978) that such a requirement provided "for sta- bility in school faculties during the integration process, . . . keying the chaiige to personnel turnover figures indicating that approximately 15% of the total faculty is replaced each year." Although the evidence show-ed that there w-as no difference in the quality of performance betw-een the white and non-white personnel in the school system, the Court of Appeals held (p. 221 that where "integration of personnel exists only in schools having both w-hite and non-white pupils, with no non-white personnel employed in the central administration section of the system," there is "racial discrimination in the assignment of teachers and other personnel." Relying on the Supreme Court's decisions in Bradley and Rogers, the Court stated (p. 22) that "[t]he [lower court] order to desegregate faculty is certainly a necessity initial step in the effort to cure the evil of racial segregation in the school system." Numerous district courts, in applying the law- as elucidated by the Supreme Court and the courts of appeal of their various circuits, have entered orders In school desegregation cases requiring the desegregation of faculty and staff. In entering such orders, a few of the district courts have also set forth their reasons in memorandum opinions. One such opinion was issued by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia in refusing to approve a plan submitted by the School Board of Greensville County, Virginia, on the PAGENO="0696" 1518 ELEMENTAHY AND sECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS ground that the plan must. but failed, to include a provision for the employ- ment and assignment of staff on a nonracial basis. Wright v. County Board of G-reen.s-ville County. Virginia. 252 F. Supp. 378 (E.D. Va. 1966). In hold- ing that a faculty desegregation provision apl)roved by the Commissioner of Education was not sufficient, the court stated (at 3S4) "The primary responsibility for the selection of means to achieve employment and assignment of staff on a nonracial basis rests with the school board. Several principles must be observed by the board. Token assignments will not suffice. The elimination of a racial basis for the employment and assignment of staff must be achieved at the earliest practicable date. The plan must contain well defined procedures which will be put into effect on definite dates. The board will be allowed ninety days to submit amendments to its plan dealing with staff employment and assignment practices." The United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia. in pro- viding for similar relief in the case of Brown v. Couniy School Board of Frederick County, 245 F. Supp. 549, 560 (1965), said: "[TI he presence of all Negro teachers in a school attended solely by Negro pupils in the past denotes that school a `colored school' just as certainly as if the words were printed across its entrance in six-inch letters." See also Kier v. County School Board of Augusta County, 249 F. Supp. 239, 247 (W.D. Va. 1966). The cases which I have reviewed establish, in my judgment, the constitutional duty of school authorities to disestablish imposed racial segregation of facilities and recognized that this obligation emanates from the principles enunciated in the Brown decision. Sincerely, RAMSEY CLARK, Deputy Attorney General. Chairman PERKINS. In connection with the preparation of your guidelines have you gone on the advice of the Attorney General and discussed the gni(lelifles with the Attorney General as required by sec- tion 6 of the Civil Rights Act. and the interpretation of that act? Have you followed the advice of the Attorney General? ~\1r. LIBAssI. Yes. Mr. Chairman. The Attorllev Generals Office was very deeply involved in the drafting and preparation and discus- sions connected with the development of the school guidelines. I might also add that every enforcement procedure must be checked with the Department of ,Tust.ice before it. is initiated. We do not move to terminate Federal funds unless the Department of Justice concurs. Chairman PERKINS. I see. You have never moved to terminate Federal funds on any enforce- ment proceedmg before you have checked it out with the Attorney General? Mr. L1BA55I. That is right, and in every case where we have recom- mended it he has concurred in our reeommendation. Chairman PERKINS. I thank you very much for a good statement. Mr. Scheuer. Mr. SCITEIJER. I have no questions. Chairman PEIUUNS. Mr. Steiger. \Ir. STEIGER. I wish it had been possible to know that von were going to appear this morning. I think that many more members of the committee might have been interested in hearing your testimony had it been announced. I would appreciate. to be very honest with von. Mr. Chairman. and I am sorry I did not. hear the. full testimony although T have gone hack and read it since you got here, but I wonder if it would be possible to have another appearance so more members would have a chance to listen to this problem? PAGENO="0697" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATIOX AMENDMENTS 1319 Chairman PE1~KrNs. It will not be l)OSSible to have another hearing unless you want it on Monday. If you want it Monda we can have another appearance but we have to start marking the bill up on Tuesday. I thought it was generally understood that the administration would be back here on the day that we wrapped up these hearings. I would be delighted to let these witnesses come back here on Monday if you want them back here on Monday but today was the day announced to conclude the hearings and there is nothing here-I just wish all of the members were here. I thought everybody knew that the administration witnesses would be back here today. Mr. STEIGER. I am sorry, Mr. Chairman. I did not realize that. On behalf of at least two of the members that I know of who ex- pressed an interest in discussing the guidelines situation, may I ask if witnesses would be willitig to come back on Monday for that purpose? I think it would be well. Chairman PERKINS. I will ask the gentlemen to come back on Monday for that purpose. Mr. STEIGER. In your statement you make the point that the border States had a more impressive record. Do you have that infonnation for the record? Mr. LIBA5sI. Yes, we do have for the record a statistical analysis of the performance of the individual States. I might by way of summary say that in September of 1966, nearly 68 percent of all of the iNegro children were attending schools on a desegregated basis in the six border States-nearly (iS percent were on a desegregated basis in the border States. Those are schools districts-schools which have at least one white school in the school district.. Perhaps the more accurate figure would be that nearly 45 percent of the Negro children are in substantially desegregated schools, that is where there are more than just a few white children in the school. Mr. STEIGER. Forty-five percent in the six border States? Mr. Lin~~ssi. That is right, in 1)elaware 85 percent, iii Kentucky 89 percent, in Maryland it is 40 percent, in Missouri it is ~T percent, Oklahoma is 40 percent and West Virginia is 83 percent. of the Negro students in those States are attending schools in substantially de- segregated schools. Mr. STEIGER. Can you give me any indication, just hurriedly going back through the paper here, you had 50 districts which niade inade- quate progress last year and had to be cited for fund termination hearings which have since come into compliance. Mr. LIBASSI. That. is right. Mr. STEIGER. How many for which von had fund termination hear- ifl~5 (lid not come into compliance? ~1r. Ljn.~ssi. At. the pie.sent time we have 35 school districts which have gone through the entire administrative process under title VI anti have been terminated for receiving any Federal funds. That is 35 school districts out of about 5,000. I might add. In addition, we have I 7T school districts that are currently in ad- ministrative. hearing stages. Some of these districts we. hope will come into compliance (luring the course of the hearings or before or after but at the present time there are 17 that have been notified for a hieaiiiig. PAGENO="0698" 1520 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDIJCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. STEIGEn. Can you give me~ any indication of the 35 school dis- tricts: are these all in the Deep South? Mr. Lin~~si. Yes, they are. There are two in Alabama, four in Arkansas, five in Georgia, 16 in Louisiana, seven in Mississippi, one in south Carolina. Mr. STEIGEIi. Of the iTT that you indicated have they been given not iee. of 1iearin~s ? Mr. Liiv~ssi. That is right. Mr. STEIGEII. Are these also all southern districts? Mr. LIB~~ssI. Yes they are. May I list them for you? Mr. STEIGER. List? Mr. LmAssi. Alabama, 51; Arkansas, seven; Florida, two; Georgia, 33; Louisiana, three; Mississippi, 41; North Carolina, 11; South Caro- lina, 16; Tennessee, three; Texas, two; and Virginia, eight. Mr. SrrIGEI~. Can you give me any indication whether you are fol- lowing the~ procedure required by last year's amendment to ESEA for a hearing within 60 days of notice that a school district is not in com- pliance? Mr. Lin~~ssi. Since the adoption of that amendment, we have noti- fied all cases. We have given all cases an opportunity for a hearing or we have listed deferral against these districts and they are receiving their Federal funds. In other words, the 117 districts that have been noti- fled for a hearing have, been notified in accordance with the Fountain amendment. Their funds are being deferred and will be continued to be deferred accordin~ to the provisions of that statute. There are 12 of iTT where no funds are being deferred at all be- cause the 60 days have elapsed and therefore deferral was lifted. Mr. STEIGER. The deferral was lifted and the funds were with- drawn Mr. LIR~ssI. The funds were reinstated to those districts because the 60 days had passed. There were 12 districts that are currently under notification of hearing where that took place. In addition, in some of the 177, the school districts themselves have asked for adjournanient of the hearing or continuation of the hear- ing beyond the 60 days and as provided by the statute where it is mu- tually agreed then deferral will continue but any district that wants a hearing within the 60 days we must and have offered it to them. Mr. S1TTc~iri. Can you give me any indication as to what you are doing in terms of examining and viewing those city school district systems for de facto segregation rather than what might be called actual segregation in the southern system? Mr. Lmxssi. Yes, the title VI applies to all 50 States and where- ever we are. al)le to establish that there was a policy and practice by law of a northern school district segregating students title VI applies. We have conducted investigations in some 30 cities in the North where some complaints were lodged alleging discrimination and seg- regation. Where we have been able to we have made recommendations to these districts for corrective action they may wish to take. Most of the districts have voluntarily taken this course of action. We have not initiated any hearings in the North. We have found that most of the districts-it has been our experience-I know of only one PAGENO="0699" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTATION AMENDMENTS 1521 that has given us only recently some difficulties, but most of the dis- tricts have been willing to provide us information and to take cor- rective action to deal with their problem. The problem of title VI as applying to the North is that the legisla- tive history made it very clear that the Circuit court decision in the case of Bell v. Gary. md.. was the governing priiiciple for title `\TJ, and that means that title VI applies only where there is an estab-~ lished violation of constitutional rights. That is the principle which guides the Department in administering the program. Mr. STEIGER. What you are saying is that your own ability to en- force title VI is dependent upon (le jure patterns of segregation, that is, patterns imposed by action of law iii a school system. Mr. Lii~~ssi. That is right. The state of the law in this is to say the least confusing. We have one circuit court decision which says there is no constitutional obligation on a school board to desegrate its schools if the segregation were brought about by circumstances beyond its control. That is the Bell v. Gary, md.. case. However, there is a district court case., Springfield, Mass., which said that there. is an obliga- tion and on the school board to correct it, so we have a confused pic- ture of the law. Nevertheless, the legislative history clearly indicated that the Bell versus Gary. md., case was to be the governing principle, and we have followed that. It is a. very good idea to know the difference between de jure and de facto segregation. I have a real question as to whether or not there is such a. thing as de facto segregation. Mr. STETGET,. What you are saying from your standpoint you enforce title VI on the basis of the Bell v. Gary. md., decision as your method of interpreting (le jure segregation? Mr. LIB\ssi. That is right. Mr. STETGER. We could ask because I think it is an interestmg ques- tion, you say that `von don't know quite what de facto segregation is. Do you define it? Mr. Liw~ssi. No, we (lout define it and the Supreme Court has not defined it yet and therefore we are limited to the wording of the Bell case which says there must be. some intent or design to deprive the children of thoir constitutional rights. `We do not. define. de facto segregation. T~oi in4allce in the (7~ a~aqo case, we said there are many serious problems of racial segregation in the city of Chicago which may violate a title VI. The. school board was willing to take corrective action and deal with their problems. Therefore we never do get to time issue of whether or not what. exist.s in that. particular city was or was not a violation of title VI. Mr. STEIGER. What kind of basis do you have for trying to deter- mimic the intent or design? Mr. Lum,~ssr. `When a complaint is filed that alleges that a school district is segregated an(l is violating title VI, the regulation requires that we conduct an investigation. The investigation attempts to ascer- ta.hi what are the facts in the situation and how did time facts come about, what~ were the decisions of the board which brought about the pattern of segregation. PAGENO="0700" 1522 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATIOX AMENDMENTS That is the basis on which we make the inquiry. Mr. STEIGEri. When you say what brings about the pattern of segre- gation. on the basis of the complaint, let's take Milwaukee, for exam- p1e~ where because they use. neighborhood schools they have had what could be caUed, I suppose, a pattern of segregation. Is this what you mean ~\1r. Lin~~~'~i. No. if a school board ~errvinanders atteiiclance zones to avoid integration in the schools, that would be a board decision in violation of the Constitution, the New Rochelle case establishes that, ail(l therefore that would be a violation of title VI. If the school board deliberately established a feeder pattern so cer- tani elements-certain elementary schools fed only certain high schools designed in such a. way to presel've segregation, that would be a board action to mamtain a pattern of segregation in violation of the Con- stitnt ion. We have possibilities of some school districts arranging transfer rights so that certain children may transfer to a white school if they live in a transitional neighborhood. This would be considered a viola- tion of title VI but it is much more difficult to establish this pattern than it is in the. South where there was a clear legally established white school and legally established Negro school, so the pattern in the South is much more obvious. Mr. STETGER. May I ask you just iwo more questions? No. 1, as von know the Civil Rights Commission has recommended that we by law set a. figure of 50 percent whites and nonwhites in schools and that achieved se~re~ation. From your own experience and background in this field, sir, is this a good move to make? Is this something we should do? Mr. LIBASSI. The proI)lenI really is one-the problem the Com- mission was addressing itself to was the fact that Negro children attending segregated schools do less adequately and enjoy less in the way of educational opportunity than when Negro children are attend- ing desegregated schools. The Commission study found that when Negro children are attend- ing predominantly white schools they do much better than when they are in a school which has only a minority of white students. I don't believe that the problem is one of a percentage point, the problem is one that Negro children do well in schools which the com- munity views as white schools, schools which do not have the status arid stigma of being an inferior Negro school, and at what point that is arrived at varies. Evidence seems to indicate that someplace in the neighborhood of 40 to ~0 percent when a school district is 40 percent white, the Negro children don't enioy equal opportunity but as the numl)er of white students increases to (Th percent. they found the stigma and status of the school changed. So I think this is where this question of the 50 pei'ce~t comes in. I am not sure that they actually recommended that hut I think they are trying to get at the point of the status of the school. When the status of the school changes, it is clear that the educa- tional opportunity for the children chances. The other thing is white children were not adversely affected when Negro students attended the school with them. That was their other major finding. PAGENO="0701" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATTOX AMENDMENTS 1523 Mr. STETGEE. This concerns nie because I wonder if when we ~et into this question of how we try to achieve quality of education iii a deprived area school, in what you call inferior type of situation, is it that we have to get the kids out of that school or do we need some- thing more into the school Is this where we need the better teachers and more and more facili- ties in order to broaden their horizons? Are we going to solve our problem by taking them out of the school to get them to a more nearly equal situation or can you achieve quality education in a predomi- nantly white school situation? Mr. Liu~~ssi. I would not want to try to interpret~ the Commission's statistical research, but I believe they are noting the fact that Negro children in predominantly white schools, regardless of their home background, regardless of the educational achievement of their par- ents, when Negro children are in predominantly white schools their educational achievement increases noticeably and measurably. rfhe Commission report also found of the compensatory education programs thus far attempted, on the scale thus far attempted were not adequate over the long run to achieve a permanent improvement in the educational achievement of the children. I do not believe they are suggesting that all remedial educational programs are inadequate nor are they suggesting that all Negro chil- dren would improve just by being in an integrated school so there is clearly a need to maintain efforts to improve the quality of educa- tion at the same time that we are attempting to increase the integrated or desegregated opportunities for children. Mr. STEIGER. Let me ask you just. one more question. You have indicated when you receive a complaint, let's say from a northern school system or from a northern big city, it is at~ that point that. the Commission and the Department will go in for an investigation to determine the pattern of segregation. What is the form of the complaint? T)oes the school board against whom the complaint is made know of the complaint and know what the complaint is? How do you work this system? Mr. Liiv~ssi. The complaints are-that are certainly receiving the most of our time and attention are usually from responsible organi- zations in the local community that document the pattern or extent to which children are segregated and indicate the extent~ to which decisions of the board may have influenced the segregation in the system. When we receive these complaints a copy of the complaint is pro- vided to the school board. Mr. STEIGEIm. With the information as to the responsible group that made the complaint. Mr. Lin~~ssi. Yes, to my knowledge when an organization f-ile.~ a complaint this is done. It is not the general rule to indicate time I(lelI- titv of the individuals as a general rule, and this is partictilarl in handling southern complaints because of the hit iiiiid~it on of coin- plainants but we usually send theY school districts ii copy of time coin- plaint in advance and ask them to advise us to the extent that they can by mail what they know about the eoinpl:oirt md he cirillmn- .ct~ iici~s ~iirrnimncl ]iig it. PAGENO="0702" 1524 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. STEIGEIi. You made the statement that ou usually provided it. Do you always ~10V1iC it or do you usually provide it? Mrs. M~n~vix. We dont always provide a copy of the complaint but the experience has been that a complainant in a northern school dis- trict will generally liv to (leal with the sdiool board first, sending a copy of their (omplaint to the school board even before they send it to us and they soit of u~e us as a last resort, realizing that we don't have too much nmscle in the northern school district situation. Mr. STEIGER. I would only make the observation that I think it would be appropriate for von to always provide the board with the complaint. You may riot necessarily wish to ideiitify and I can appreciate the situation in the southern school system in which you might not want to identify the specific person involved but it would only be appropriate from your standpoint as well as the board's to have au opportunity to review the complaint. Mr. Luv~ssi. If it is not time complaint itself, it is the essence of the complaint and the allegations are fully made to the school district. We do riot \vancler into a school district and engage in an investiga- tion which does not disclose fully the problems which have been brought to our attention and these are macic fully available to the school district. I will see to it and make sure on Monday that that it is the case, that there is no effort on our part. Mr. STFJGER. I think it would be well to do that. Do von always inform the school district prior to the coming into the district for an investigation that you will he there? Mr. Liwssr. Yes, sir: that is done. In our southern field investiga- tions we do not inform the school district that we are interviewing parents or children but we do inform and advise the school district that we are coming into the school district and wish to discuss the case with them. Mr. STI:IGETi. Canyon give me an opportunity to fill me in on why you may handle the South differently from the North in these kinds of problem areas? Mr. LTBASSI. Most of our southern complaints come from small rural districts. There is a serious problem of safety, physical safety as well as economic reprisals which is a constant danger that the peo- plc are living under in these smaller more isolated districts. Mr. ~TEIGER. Is there a legal difference between what vou do in the North and in the south Mr. LIBASsI. There isa difference in responsibility in terms of the protection of the individual parents and children who may be raising complaints. In the south we tell-we always tell the school district exactly the nature of the complaint and we have fully disclosed the problem which has been brought to our attention and frequently we must disclose the identity of the parent if it is a problem that a 1)arent alleges a (~iiil(l was iillpl'OpeIly disciplined. Of course we have to reveal the identity of the child to conduct the inve~ti~atinn. But if it is a general complaint that children are gen- erally harassed in the corridors of the school and teachers are not tak- ing iide(1llate steps to prevent the liarassuient of the schools, we simply advise time superintendent we received this coml)laiflt, ask him PAGENO="0703" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTATJON AMENDMENTS 1525 to look into it and ask him what correrl ive steps he ~a1i take to make sure the children are not harassed in tile school. In those cases it is not necessary to reveal the identity but where it is necessary, we niake it available. Mr. S'rl:I(;l:Im. \Viiat von are saving is this is an a(lministrative de- cision as to how von will handle it. It is not. covere(l by tire statutory language or time. iul es promulgated 1 ~y the Departnient. Mr. Liir~ssi. Title VI regulatioli wiiicim was approved 1 cv the Presi- dent, and I have some copies here, 5l)ecifically piovides that time iclen- tity of the coniplaiinuit shaH not be revealed. In section SftT (e) the identity of complainants shall be kept con- fideiit.ial except to the extent. iecessarv to carry out the purposes of this part including the conduct. of any invest gat ion, hearing or judicial proceeding arising thmeieunder. Mr. STEIGEIl. That iS ill the administrat ice rules that. the President drew UI) for title VI ? Mr. Liw~ssi. ~1 es, sir; that is ri~ht. ~\Ir. Si'I:lGErm. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Piuucixs. Mr. Scheuer. Mr. Sci-rrvu:R. Can you tell us whether t lie eourt.s have passed on the constitutionality and the appropriateness of your guidelines Mr. LulAssI. rI~l1e Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, in a three-judge court, recently issued an extensive ruling finding that the provisions and requirenients of the guidelines were propei~, were constitutional and were in accord with the law. ihe. three-judge court. thereupon directed that a general decree be fashioned applicable to mmli of the districts in the circuit which would establish a uniform plan for desegregation of school districts under voluntary choice which is iclen- tical to tile guidelines prOviSiOns adopte(l by hEW. Now on the 10th of this month, the full P2-judge court. reheard argu- ment. on this case. l)ecision has not been rendered as vet. Mr. STUmER. Is this the Judge Wisdom decision in New Orleans? Mr. Liivmssi. That is right. rihmis is time most. recent and the most. conmpreiiensive. There have been other (lecisions of other courts either specifically affirming tile guidelines or adopting provisions or saving that. timey are minimal so that time fifth circuit (leciSion, time, re- cent one is not time only one that has been 1en(lered. ~\Ir. ScI-iEuJum. In other wor(IS other courts have affirmed the valid- ity of time guidelines? Mr. Liiv~ssi. Perhaps Mr. Bell, Mr. Chairnma.n, might be able to that statement. Mr. BELL. I think time last three or four times in which time Fifth Circuit. Court of Appeals which handles time great J.)u]k of the school desegregation litigation has handed down decisions in the past few years, they have commented most favorably about tile guidelines. They have in(lieate(l that they wouIl(l accord the giiidel ines a high l)Iace as mininuim standards in det.erniiiiing appropriate. desegrega- tioli I)hafls for school districts. It was their intention to then attach great weii~hit to the standards established 1w the (.)ffice of Education asserting that al)sent legal ques- tions the F.S. Office of Education is better qual died than the courts and is the more appropriate Federal body t.o weight these plans. PAGENO="0704" 1526 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTCATION AMENDMENTS lucy t bought they were ninunial. ~uul they doubted that they would 1 )C too hnrh. The Court of Xl)Peais for the Eighth Circuit which in terms of school deseuregation involves Arkansas has made similar stateilients in the last two or three times in which it has ruled in school (leseglegat ion cases, again indicating in 11lo(lelillg its decree or (leter- mining the type of decree the district court should formulate it should give great weight to tile Office of Education guidelines. Most recently the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit., al- though talking most specifically about the hospital guidelines has also in(licated its approval of the kinds of standards for dessegregation that the I)epartment of Health, Education, and Welfare. has promulgated. Mr. SCHEIJER. I take it that the Federal courts have ruled on the apl)llcal)illtv of the ~-~upreine Court decision in some so-called problem States in the South like Louisiana, Georgia, South Carolina, Missis- sippi. How \vouldl on compare the severity or tile stringency of the Federal court's interpretation of the Supreme Court in the pattern of compliance that they have established with the severity or stringency of the guidelines? Mr. BEu~. It is a hard question. \lr. ~cii~ui:n. Are the gui(lehines, in effect, more severe and more stringent and rigid than the circuit court-the Supreme Court inter- pretation and decision? Are they in fact more strict? Mr. B]ir~L. The guidelines and the earlier ones were based in the main on a summary of all of the court decisions so from that stand- point I would say they were no more strict. What happened of course- Mr. SCHEDER. In other words they have not gone beyond? Mr. B~L. I think they have not gone beyond, but in looking at our charts revealing all of the school districts listed down and we will have a column with all of the court order districts and we will find in many of the Deep South States there is more progress being made in the districts desegregating under HEW guideines than those operat- ing under court order. Mr. SCHEUER. How do you explain that? 1'. BELL. We have been able to give a closer supervision of tile standards under the guidelines thami have courts been generally will ilIg or ai)le to provide in a 1U(licial sense. Judge Wisdom has said in his opinions and Judge Tuttle has said on the bench and li~ his opinions and in speeches that the courts are pretty poor places in which to administer a school system and they would like to get out from under it and that they just can't handle all of the kinds of problems that come up. They may issue a specific order, they have to issue a specific order, 111(1 tIme s(hool hoard attorneys sit down and say, "WTe1T they said this 1 wt they left the door open, ha. ha. ha." and they go on their way while they try the same thing with the HEW guidelines someone else sends in a complaint or we can much more easily or readily say, "No that avenue is not open either." So you do tend to have more progress in a closer administration of the progress than is possible under the court orders. Mr. LIBAssI~, I might add to that that the earlier court decisions required far less than the HEW guidelines. PAGENO="0705" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTJCATION AMENDMF;NTS 1327 The HEW guidelines are in step with the current most recent court decision. They do not go beyond them. The significance of the fifth circuit decree is in its most recent case is that it would, in effect, bring up to date all of the court orders issued earlier in this process up to the point that the court is now establishing for the districts. Mr. SCHEUER. I just want to clarify in my own mind that the guide- lines have not extended their nianclate beyond the areas aiicl glu(le- lines established by the Federal courts. Mr. Lm~~ssi. The guidelines require~ no more thaii what the courts have been requiring, particularly the circuit courts. Chairman PERKINS. Before you leave this point I personally am very much impressed with the way you are handling the guideline problem which always causes considerable criticism, which in reality, on occasion, could be discrimination in reverse. I make that statement because as a young prosecuting attorney I had an awfully lot of experience with misdemeanors and felonies not complymg with the law and so on. When we fail to give a local edu- cational agency the basis of that complaint or fail to furnish them with a copy of the exact complaint, we are really not complying with the standards of justice that have been handed (lown to us through centuries and centuries. I don't think we should have a different standard of justice through- out the country. It should be uniform in the North as well as in the South. I make this observation because I think none of us is infallible and we will slip up occasionally but I think in the future where you could furnish all local school districts the exact nature of the com- plaint, then everybody will know that it is not unfounded and it is not inspired for some selfish motive and it will work and redound to the benefit of the Office of Education in administering the guidelines in bringing about what you are seeking at the earliest possible date. I just make that assertion because, as a prosecuting attorney, so many people came to me and wanted to prosecute hut did not want to get out in the open, and I would just say, "Well, you have no case." I think time same holds true ever where under our system of gov- ernment~. That would help you in a better, more helpful administra- tion. I know the situation has been different in the North from the South. I recognize all of those aspects of your problem, but I will say by and large I think you have done~ an excellent job. I do not mean to be critical but we can always improve a little more. Mr. LimE~ssi. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me assure you that the Secretary is very strict that this program must be operated as fairly as it is humanly possible to administer a program and we are extremely cautious in dealing with civil rights that we do not abuse civil liberties and no funds to a school district are terminated except on evidence presented before a hearing examiner publicly according to die school district full opportunity to cross-exanhine witnesses and full disclosure of all the information to a hearing examiner which would be the basis for a decision to terminate fund~. Chairman PERKINS. I thought that was the policy. There is no termination until the local educational agency has the exact nature of the charge and has the right, to cross-examine w-il iivsses. dearly ~et their point of view before the Office of Education. That staternent~ is correct? T~-4~l2--i~T----pt. 2--4~ PAGENO="0706" 1 52S ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. Liiixssi. rrliat is right. Chairman PERKINS. Mi. Dellenback. Mr. 1)ELLENBACK. I apologize for not having been here for your tub test iniully. I read your statement, Mr. Libassi. I am sorry I inis~ed tile other additions that went on in my absence I)ut there are a couple of aieas that I would like to have some further informa- tion on. As I iead yntir statement. I see that. your title deals with special assi4alits for civil ng!its, the question arises in my mind, how do you attempt to nieasure at all. the eI~ect on education of tile moves you take iii the clirectioii of desegregation? ~1oiii statistics that von cited at the end are statistics relative to what What nieasure do von have of the effect of these moves on education ~uir cs)mment is really running to a thing that any of us who have worked in eduration ifl either our State or any other basis are con- cerlle( about s(ho( d dist ri t consolidation are well aware of. WTe know where there, is no problem of segregation at all that you do have the separate educaional problem of consolidation and certainly ad- vantages flow. \Ve are aware of this. But iet~s talk about meshing in the improve- ment of education with the elIfordeilient. of policies of integration. ~oii give. us a. statistic in the tail end of your presentation. It deals with the number of Negro students attending desegregated schools has increase(l markedly and you give the percentages. This deals wit Ii segregation and integration. W~hat is the effect of this act ion on the educational quality of the school aside from the consohi(latiofl probienis? Take a small school as an example. Mr. Liiv~ssi. Time. univ studies we. have~-and I must admit this is an area of growing research but. the equal opportunities study of the Office of Education and theY recently released report of the Civil Rights Commission-both of these Stll(lieS verify the finding that the educa t tonal achievement of Negro children increases measurably and permanently when they aie integrated in schools which are predoini- nantlv white. Mr. DELLEXB.\CK. Who made this particular study? Mi. Lnv~ssi. The equal opportunity study was made by the Office of Education. Mr. SCnEn~R. That is the so-called Coleman report? Mr. LTIv\SST. That is right. Xnd in addition the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights recently released a report on racial isolation in public schools and their study also verified the fact that in terms of verbal skills the Negro chil(lren did far better when they moved to an in- te~rated school. ~ATso the. studies show that the longer a child attends an integrated school the better are his grades and better is his educational achieve- ment record, so that. the. evidence does indicate that when a child mnve~ into an integrated school which is predominantly white his achievement increases. The. earlier he. starts in an integrated school, the greater will be his achievement and the longer he stays in an integrated school. Mr. l)ELLrxmm~\CK. Perhaps I should ask this question with my left. eye cocked toward my colleague. from New York. has there been a PAGENO="0707" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTTCATION AMENDMENTS 1529 dropoff in any wax liv those in the school before or has there been an improvement with the new additions Mr. LIBA5SI. Where ~\egro stiideiits are mtrocluce.d into predonii- nantly white schools there is no measurable disadvantage to the white children in the school. The studies also indicate where a minority of the children are white, they are not affected favorably by being iii piedomninaittly Negro schools. In essence what the studies are showing is that where you have a majority white school and you introduce a minority of Negro children in the school, the Negro children (To better and there is no dis- advantage to the white children. On the other hand, when you have an all Negro school which has the stigma of inferior status in the community, Negro children do poorly and if you have some white children in that school they will do poorly also. Mr. DELLENBACK. What is this? Mr. Lnv~ssi. It is not clear. Thieve are some authorities who would say that the experience of attenclimig a school which the students know or feel is inferior, that the teachers believe is inferior, that the school administrators believe is inferior, and which the community looks upon as inferior, where everyone's expectation is that the performance will be poor, the teachers and students tend to measure down to the low achievement expected. Mr. SCIIELER. You might refer to that as a self-fulfilling prophecy. Mr. Lm~ssi. Yes. i\Ir. BELL. We have a. growing debate-if you have a Negro school and white school in which the quality of teachers and the size of the building and so on are the same, in many of the school districts we are dealing with that are giving us problems and where we are making some progress, we don't reach that kind of problem. Before I came on hoard to help the Government I worked as an attorney with one of the large civil rights organizations and tried to supervise roughly 200 school desegregation cases. In the process I got to travel fairly widely. The kind of discussion we are having here is not the problem. To see the equipment, the kids piled on to the busses, the lack of adequate playground facilities, the general poor quality of the teachers was to know without making care- ful balancing and measuring that no really decent education could be obtained in these schools. When we get to the other kind of thing that the Civil Rights Com- mission is weighing, it deals more with the kind of problem of what can we do with the northern schools. Can we do something with the ghetto schools ? 1 think someone raised the question by input, Mr. Steiger said, or do we have to take t lie kids out That is another problem. In the South in the districts which we are dealing with in time main, that is not the problem. Mr. DELLENBACK. In earlier testimony over the last several weeks- I think sonie of the questioning was by the chairman-J thought a sound point was made that. at least caused me some concern. Do we find ever in view of what is availal)le under title I of "Educa- tion. Elemeimtar and ~econclai, where we are dealing with special aids to the educationally disadvanta ed that w-hen we push desegrega- PAGENO="0708" 1530 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDICATIOX AMENDMENTS tion we find two forces which work against each other, that there might be in a school ~oiiie ~pe'ia1 help that is coining under title I, `~E1emen- tary and Secondary .` to improve the educational procedures perhaps in an all Negro school and you integrate some of these children in an all white school which does not have these special programs and in effect they lose in part although they perhaps by what you just said may be gaining in part Have any studies been made of these cross-effects? Mr. Liw~ssi. ~\ot. to my knowledge. However, the Office of Educa- tion is making it clear to the school districts that where a child moves from a segregated school to a desegregated school that. the title I pro- gram and projects would be available to assist that child in the deseg- re~ate(1 school. `I am not too familiar with this. This is miot my area of specialty but let, me say some districts felt the only place they could provide the title I program was in the all-Negro segregated school which tende(l to retard the desegregation of the school. The Office of Education has now made it clear that the title I project may follow the child when he moves into a desegregated school and I would be happy to submit for the record the memorandum of the Commissioner of Education on this matter. I am not suggesting that desegregation is the single only objective of Federal educational policy, it is not. It is clear that the Federal policy is one of improving the quality of education for every child as we increase the desegregation experience for as many children as possible at the same time. Mr. DELLENBACK. Personally. Mr. Chairman. I would welcome for the record this memorandum. Chairman PEEKINS. Without objection it is so ordered. (The documents referred to appeals on p. ltS21.) Mr. T)ELLENBAC1c In addition to that I can see certain problems that would arise as a practical matter if on move a 10th of a school out into another area. If you then try to move title I moneys along with them, you either compound the segregation in the new school because you are now going to take this new group and put them aside and give them spe- cial treatment which means they are not really desegregated or else von take one-tenth of the moneys that are necessary and spread them too thinly across everybody's new schools some of which do not need it and it just does not (10 the job or you have some of this type of me- chanical 1)rob1ei~1 or you multiply the money by 10 so everybody gets time special program and there is not that much money so I see prob- lems along that line. Mr. Lum.~ssi. TI ere are and T (li(T not mean to imply with a flip answer that there was. An effort is being made not to discontinue programs which children need as part of the desegregation. But I must say that the experiences of the children in desegregated shools, the children I have spoken to. their experience in desegregated schools is such a positive opportunity for expanding educational opportunity that it is most impressive to see that both desegregation and improving the qualities of education through funds can improve equal educa- tional opportunities for children. PAGENO="0709" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EI)UCATION AMENDMENTS L531 Mr. DELLENBACK. So there is no misunderstanding. let lire say I am greatly concerned with equal opportunities all(l I think it is treiiien- dously important. I sit here today as a member of the Education Cominitte.e concerned about the problem of education and being sure that what. looks like an advantageous step in one field does not pro~ to be. disadvantageous in the area which is of the primary concern of this committee; namely, that the educational opportunities are advanced as rapidly and as thoroughly as possible. I do not know that this needs to go into the record because I sus- pect Mr. Perkins and Mr. Scheuer are aware of these other studies on the impact of these moves but if possible I would like to see some of these studies. I do not know if we have them in the committee's file. Mr. Lnv~ssi. I would be glad to make them available to von and have staff available to discuss them. Mr. DELLEx1i~cK. I would be interested in knowing what studies have been made in this particular area on this particular point. Following this, if I may, you have eliminated a second question I jotted down as I was trying to think the problem through and that is how do we coordinate the work of the Secretary for civil rights with the work of tile Commissioner for Education? Your answer as I read you is that you coordinate it by making tile commissioner for education responsible so that he does not. have to worry about what the secretary in civil rights is doing, and the respon- SiI)ility falls on Mr. Howe: is that right? Mr. LIBASSr. i am a policy a(lviser to the ~ecretarv. I attempt to coordinate the activities of the agency. I handle the relationslli1)s with the Justice Department. I consult with the Commissioner on policy but the decision on policy is the Commissioner of Education in conjunction with the Secreary of the Department but tile Commis- sione.r is the one who issues the guidelines, who dleei(les what the guide- hues will provide and what the will not provide. It is the Commissioner who determines whether to terminate funds to a particular school district, it is tire Coninuissioner who decides whether progress is adequate or inadequate and it is tire Commissioner who attempts to integrate these v~iriouis proitrams. Mr. DELLEXBACK. In this field of edunat ion t~ the ext cut that von are responsible even to assist, von are act i mug as sta if for the Coninuis- sion in this regard. lou assist the Commissioner in flue estal)lislunent of the guidelines which are his responsibility and the enforcement of these guidelines which are his responsihil itv in measuring the effect. of the guidelines in the application of these. policies which uire his respon- sildlitv. Is that right? Mr. LIBAsSI. That is right. i\Ir. DELLENBACK. I don't mean to take von over elementary lessons which the other members of the committee may already be fully ap- pri~ed of and von may have even touched on it earlier toda and if von did you may still realize this is very simple, hut ran you just with- out going into meticulous detail tell me about this matter of the es- tabl~shme,nt. of guideline here? Is the basic establishment for the guidelines in effect. the last paragraph of your i)Iesent it ion to us, the PAGENO="0710" 1532 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDtTCATION AMENDMENTS establishment of this basic goal to assure that no person is excluded, and so on and so forth ? What is the basic authority of establishment of these guidelines? I am talking about the Civil Rights Act and not elementary and second- ary education. Mr. LIBAssI. Fnder the Civil Rights Act we have adopted general rules and regulations which must be approved by the President. These are what are known as the title VI regulations. The title VI re~ulations applies to all programs in the department and pro- vides that each of the operating agencies will issue instructions, infor- mational materials, guides which would be applicable to the particular programs that they administer. We found that when we simply announced the school districts that they should prepare desegregation plans that they were left at a great loss as to what the desegregaion plans should include, what the re- quirements ought to be, what the Office of Education would accept. So the school officials themselves asked for some policy guidance as to what the desegregation plan should include and what we would accept as an appropriate desegregation plan so the first step of guide- lines were prepared at the request of school superintendents in an ef- fort to enable them to prepare their plans. At a recent meeting I asked the superintendents in one State if they thought we ought to abolish the ~uidelines and just allow them to try to work it out on their own and there was very strong feeling that they needed some indication from us as to what was expected of them under the regulation. Mr. DELLENBACK. Are these guidelines a single set of guidelines ap- plicable to all schools in all areas or are there different ones for one set of schools and a different set for another area? Mr. LIBASSI. The ~iiidelines are applicable to all of the districts They provide if a school district is operating a single non racial school svsfem~ as most of the northern districts do, they should file a par- ticular document. This is provided for under the guidelines. I might add. in'iclentally. that there is a crowing number of school districts in the South that are also submitting a document that states they are flow completely desegregated. This is provided for under the guidelines. The guidelines then provide if the district was operating a dual school system and was constitutionally O1)ligated to desegregate the school sstem. then it mi~t submit a plan for desegregation and most of the guidelines deal with the provisions for the plan. The fact is in the 17 Southern States that were formerly se~regated by law the bulk of the impact of the guidelines is applicable to the Southern States. Mr. DELLENB\CK. Are they published in the Federal Rei~ister? i\[r. LTw\ssT. Yes. they are, and I have copies I would l)e ~lad to make available to the committee. Mr. DELLENBACK. Are there methods for establishing these guide- lines? ~\[r. J~jn~ssr. The ~uidelines issued for September 1966 have been reissued for Septemher 1967 already without change. One of the basic criticisms of our program in the past was that the guidelines were is- PAGENO="0711" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1533 sued too late to be of any help to the districts so rather than wait until March as we did last year we put. the guidelines out in Decem- ber of this year, fully 9 months in advance of the operating of the school year and we put them out without change. The major problem we again faced was that the school dist.ricts were dealing with a new document which was complicated and legalistic in language. lVe find the school districts are working with the second document the se.cond year, they are familiar with it., they know where the changes are and we are finding more receptivity on the part of the school district. Chairman PERKINS. Do you have the same guidelines in 1967 as there were in 1966? Mr. LIBASSI. Yes, sir. We expect the school districts in September 1961 t.o continue making progress towa.rd the dual school system but t.he procedures and the rules by which they are to achieve that prog- ress remain the same for September of 1967 as they were in Septem- berof 1966. Mr. DELLENBACK. The chairman asked you earlie.r in the enforce- ment of guidelines if you gave adequate notice that went t.hrough proper procedures which I think is extremely important. This could cover protests as to whether or not a school was in fact. complying with the guidelines. Do you have available also some procedures whereby a school dis- trict could prot.est the guidelines themselves as opposed to applica- tion of the guidelines in various instances? Would they have to go to t.he courts t.o do this? Mr. LIBASSI. They can do this through the administrative proc- ess. WnIiat. they caii do and some have done this. they refuse to sign a.ssuranc.e thatthey would comply with title VI and the guidelines. That. raises the issue clearly without regard to the fact.s in. the par- ticular case. We also present. at our hearings not only the fact that they have refused to sign but we also present the facts. The school district can raise any issue it wants in the hearing about the legality of the guidelines or the provisions even if they are complying with them. Mr. DET~LENBAc1c Have there been any such atta(ks on the guide- lines themselves? Mr. LIBAs5I. The have been no court rulings or decjsions which have indicated any illegality or impropriety of the guidelines. Now the cases are going through the administrative process now and we expect within the next month or two that the first cases of terminat- ing funds will he going to coui-t and the school district will thereby be seeking judicial review of the administrative hearing process. At that point we will begin to get more of the cases. As was asked earlier there are several court. decisions which have indicated that the guidelines are proper and in accord with court. decisions but we have never had a fund cutoff reviewed by a court yet.. Mr. DELLI:NBACK. The discussions are always better agreed to out of court. I agree with his honor who said courts are no place to administer schools. PAGENO="0712" 1534 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLCATION AMENDMENTS 1-his the T)ejairtn~ent at any time in listening to these protests Ino~l1he(T its guidelines on the basis of protest? Mr. Lin.~ssr. I nder the guidelines winch I niust. say are extremely flexible, we have (luring the course of processing cases accepte(l plans oii review by higher officials in the Office of Education so that where a school district would come up with a particular plan and a staff person who felt the phauis was not acceptable on review by other officials in the 1)epartment or in the Office of Education we have accepted them. So there is a considerable flexibility in the administration of the guidelines to allow for dealing with the problems of individual sit nations. Also school districts themselves, after we have. notified them for a hearing will come in and say well, now I think we can work out a plan for (lesegregation would you accept. this, and if it meets the gen- eral requirements for substantial progress start movement, we accept these plans and discontinue the hearings. Mr. DET~r~ExBAc1. We have been talking about segregation among Negro and Caucasian. For example, are there any truly Puerto Rican schools and are there any other areas in the United States where we have desegregation problems that. deal with other than Negro-white? Mr. Ln~AssI. Yes, there are very few in terms of numbers. There are a few Indian schools which are operated by public school systems which are involved in the. process of desegregation. I (lon't know of any others. Maybe Mrs. Martin if you wish, could comment on this further. Mrs. MARTIN. We have gotten complaints from the West involving Indians. Mexican-Xmericansq but again it. is the de facto type prol)- lem where the residential areas are Puerto Rican or Mexican Ameri- can and the schools reflect the neighborhoods so we deal with those problems as we would in Manhattan or a Milwaukee problem. It is not a. guideline problem. Mr. STEIGER. Would the gentleman yield for a. moment? Mr. DELLENBACK. Yes; I yield. Mr. STEIGER. Maybe I missed it but did you specify the number of school districts that have not been willing to sign a compliance? Mr. Limr~ssi. Yes: and this is as of March 14th and this is a con- stantly changing problem in terms of numbers, but we have 96 districts that have refused to sign a. statement that they would comply with the regulations or the guidelines. Some have submitted a statement but then they have qualified it to the extent we will comply with only part of the gui(lelines but not other parts. Now this 96 is included in my overall figure of the district we have notified for hearing. Mr. STEIGER. Ninety-six out of one hundred seventy-seven? Mr. Ljii.~ssr. It is 96 omit of the, total number of cases that we have had any dealings with including terminations. Sonie of these have already been terminated-~39, so it is 9() school districts out of 2~9 which is all of the cases that. have either been terminated finally or are in the process of hearing, or districts that refused to sign at all. So von can see that is a very good part of the number of cases that we are dealing with. PAGENO="0713" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTCAT1ON AMENDMENTS 1535 Mr. STEIGER. Do von have any idea then at all or can you provide for the committee the number of complaints that you have received? Mr. LIBASSI. Yes, we could provide that for the committee. I am sorry we do not have it but we would be glad to supply the number of complaints we have. Mr. STEIGER. Can you break it down on a State-by-State basis? Mr. Liw~ssi. Yes; we will be glad to do that. Mr. ScHi~uER. Would my colleague yield at this point for a question? Mr. STEiGER. Yes; of course. Mr. ScrIEuE1~. \Vhere there have been complaints, what. number of cases have been ended by a decision of the school board to comply Mr. LiiiAssi. Wlien we initiate a. review of school (listricts some- times it is initiated on the basis of a complaint and more often it is based on the data that a school district provides us. Let me say we have initiated about 290 hearings and we only have 239 presently in the works which would indicate that at the hearing stage we have settled about 50 cases. Now I do not have the number of districts that. were found to have made inadequat.e progress but then took additional steps but I would say it is a sizable number, one to 150 school districts easily have the process of negotiation prior to the hearing taken additional steps to come into compliance. Mr. ~cmmEuEu. I think it. would be extremely helpful if you would give this c.omnnttee a p1('t~lI'e of the, positive accomplislunent short of the court order process that on have pi~o~~ided through effective conciliation and the a(lvisory process. Apparently there are a number of hard core cases where after the conciliation and the advisory and the investigation process there is a formal statement of refusal to comply is made. by the local school board. It would be interesting to see of all of the school districts where there was a problem, at whatever stage it was raise(L the number which could solve, their own problem managed to fin(l the. leadership locally to solve their prol)iem short of a flat refusal to comply. Mr. Limixssi. I would like to try to provide it. I confess we have been under such, since this committee does not rule on our appropria- tions I suppose it is all right if I cry a little bit about our appropria- tions without l)eing improper. We onl have 43 staff l)eople working on school desegregation and they have been mostly in the field and we have not developed the kind of statistical reporting analysis that would demonstrate this process of change but I would be very glad to try to document the instances-first of all when a staff person gets out and says, look, this is just not enough progress min(l the Superin- tendent, will say what do you think I imeed to do and lie will suggest additional transfer of faculty, rerunning, a second choice period, transferring a. class over, closing a small school. Xow the superintendent. w-ihl say I can do that and time staff perso1~ will say fine. Well that will dispose, of thìe matter. Those cases are going on constantly. In addition in Virginia for instance our staff person in Virginia has clone an excellent job at that level before we ever get to even a formal letter. PAGENO="0714" 1536 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. ScIIEUER. It seems to me this is reafly of paramount impor- tance. It. seems to me your success can be measured not by the nuniber of schools you meet in court but by the number of cases that never get to court where through the leadership, the council, the advice and the technical assistance you give to a school district, a school district does want to solve their problem and a way of entering the ~Ut1i century not being dragged in by the courts kicking and screaming but entering of their own volition. Perhaps to me that is a greater test of the effectiveness of your work: and that evidence may provide the greatest and most dramatic proof that von should have additional counseling staff to provide this lea(lership and the support in your agencies. Mr. DELn~xBAcIc 1 would join my colleague in this study. A good lawyer ofttimes succeeds by keeping his client out of court, not winning the case when he gets there: he may have done a superb job in case after case after case which never appears on the court record. So that anything which could be done which would not place an additional burden on your staff and tie up your staff, I think, would be helpful to us. Just dragging figures out of the blue and saying this is what we accomplished or this is where we stand, and soon would not be too helpful. Mr. ScI~ruER. Before I joined this great body, I served as housing chairman of the State commission on human rights arid had a great deal to do with the. drafting of our nondiscrimination legislation and I had a great deal to do with enforcement. I know our real sue- cesses were cases nobody ever heard of. These were cases where we sat down with a local community or a local real estate developer and said look, we have a problem here, how do we solve it the easy way? It is quite true that the courts are not the most appropriate agencies for solving social prol.)hems in a community. We always felt a. great feeling of pride when we settled cases quietly in conference rooms without the imnecessarv and unpleasant bitterness and frozen posi- tions that are almost inevitalile when cases come to the courts. It. hardens positions. PeoPle get entrenched; they dig in and minds clo~e and there are possible avenues for narrowing the gap in the traditional proceRs. I can't overemphasize the importance of the rec- ord of showing previous success your have had before these letters of refusal to comply come in. Mr. DELLENBArK. Not only do such statistics demonstrate what your Department is doing but. it seems to say something highly relevant about. the law itself. It. is talking about the way in which the statutes are working under has accomplished and might not very well have been done at all if the statute had not been passed. Mr. SCHE~ER. It might. also give us some very interesting informa- tion about. local leadership and the local will to improve social situations, not only in cities in the North but. in cities in the South. I would like to know about communities that have solved their problems. Mr. DELLENBACK. May I finish my last point? PAGENO="0715" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTCATION AMENDMENTS 1537 Then dealing with this broad scale question of minorities, while the heavy emphasis both in the public eye anti in your actual operations deals with Negroes, that we do have some situations where we are deal- ing with Indians or Mexican-American mixtures. Do we have any in the big city of New York where we are dealing with the Puerto Ricans where there is such a heavy concentration of Puerto Ricans that there is a school which is predominantly Puerto Rican? Mr. Luvussi. I am sure there are schools which are predominantly Negro and Puerto Rican-Mr. Scheuer probably could comment on this better than I-whiere there is a question on that but let me assure you we are as concerned about other national and racial minorities in the administration of the program as we are about Negroes. It is just the sheer size of the Negro minority and the extent of the pro hi em. Mr. DELLEXBACK. Are there any others, to round out my education, other than these we have touched on Mr. SCIIIEUER. how about Japanese-Americans iii San Francisco and Denver? Mr. LIB~~ssIE. I would be glad to check as to the extent of predom- inantly oriental schools and I would be very glad to submit that to time committee. I will check on that. I don't really know. Mr. DELLENBACK. I am talking like a far westerner now who does not known about this but are there any areas in this Nation where we still have what might be called an ethnic problem such as with Ger- man-Americans or Scandinavian-Americans in such places as Wiscon- sin? Do we have any other pure white problem where you have a heavy ethnic concentration that ought to be. involved? Mr. LuLuSsi. This tends to be a (luninislung issue. IVe have some of these groups in larger cities anti you will find a dominant Polish, Italian ancestry to most of the families living there-Irish, we do have some of these concentrations remailling but these are not issues that seem to come up in the administration of the school systems them- selves anti do not seem to be items which affect equal educational OppOi't unit ies. Mr. DELLEXBACK. When we. deal with race, color, or national origin, -we are not really dealing much with national origill Mi. LIJiASSI. That is right. Chairman PERKINS. Let me thank all of von witnesses. (The document referred to follows :) STATEMENT OF F. PETER LIBAssI, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE SECRETARY FOR CIVIL RIGhTs. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: I appreciate this opportunity to appear before this Committee to discuss the Department's administration of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and to answer any questions you may have. As this Committee knows, the school desegregation policies of the Office of Education have also been reviewed by the House Committees on Rules and on the Judiciary. The two provisions of the school desegregation policies that are most critical to effectuating desegregation are the requirement that freedom of choice plans operate fairly and effectively to achieve desegregation and that faculties be as- signed without regard to race. On both of these issues, the Department has been advised by its General CoIm- sel and by the Department of Justice that the policies of the Office of Education PAGENO="0716" 153S ELEMENTAHY ANt) SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS are fully consistent with and supported by Title VT of the Civil Rights Act of 196-1 and the decisions of Federal courts. In essence the policies of the Department permit a district to initiate the de- segregation of its schools by offering the children a choice of schools. The method of student assignment which has been traditional in most parts of the country has been by assigning children to neighborhood schools on the basis of geographic attendance zones. This method takes no account of the preference of the student and may well result in his assignment to a school against his expressed wish. The assignment of students to particular schools upon the basis of the stu- dent's choice has, in the main, been an innovation adopted in connection with the desegregation of schools that have previously been segregated upon a basis of race. It has been accepted as a permissible means of desegregation. but courts have made it clear that it can be used only if it is effective in abolishing the dual racial school system. Where community hostility or other pressures preclude a truly free choice, then some other method must be used in converting to a nonracial system. In sum, it has been the position of this Department that the free choice system is a permissible method of desegregation only if it is effective in eliminating the dual system based on race. If it is not effective, then an alternative method of assigning children to particular schools, not based upon the choice of students or their parents, must be adopted. With respect to faculty, the Department of Justice has advised that Title VI not only permits the Department to require faculty desegregation, but obliges the Department to do so as a condition for continued Federal financial assistance. Furthermore, every effort has been made to assure that these policies are administered fairly and objectively. School districts are scheduled for review based on a district's own report of the extent of actual or anticipated student and faculty desegregation. In August 1966, the Commissioner notified the State education agencies, as well as all local school districts, that it would be the policy of the Office to review the districts with the poorest performance first approximately 250 school districts were in this category. At the same nine. the Commissioner stated that another 400 districts that had made some progress would be scheduled for review during the school year. These 400 districts were urged to take steps on their own to improve the extent of student and faculty desegregation. The largest number of districts, between 700 and 800, w-ere noti- fied that their performance was adequate and no review of their plans would l)e undertaken. The Committee should know that generally the 250 school districts that were the first reviewed, those with the poorest performance, had no student desegre- gation or less than 2 percent of the Negro students in formerly white schools, and no faculty desegregation. In addition, many districts had: (a) denied choices by Negro students to attend white schools, (b) discouraged Negroes from choosing a white school, (c) intimidated both parents and students. d) failed to make efforts to prepare the community for desegregation, (e) had not followed requirements of the Guidelines vital to its success-such as mailing time choice fornis home, publishing the plan in the paper. etc. Recently, at Department administrative hearings, Negro parents testified of nightriders shooting into their homes; that their insurance coverage on their homes was cancelled for no apparent reason after they enrolled their children in a white school; that their children as well as themselves had been harassed and threatened. They spoke of losing their jobs, their credit and sometimes their homes when they chose a white school. The transcripts of these hearings give a more vivid picture of community attitudes and pressures in these districts than anything I might say. During the course of field reviews, where progress is not sufficient to carry out the purposes of Title VI. renewed efforts are made to secure voluntary com- pliance. The Office of Education is obligated by Title VI to make these efforts. Implicit in this duty is a responsibility to make suggestions and recommendations to school districts of steps that they may want to consider to meet their obliga- tion to desegregate the schools. The effort is made to tailor the suggestions and recommendations to meet the problems of each particular school district. For example, where a district buses its white or Negro students. on the basis of their race, to a neighboring district to be educated, it would be recommended that this practice cease and all the children he educated in their home district. PAGENO="0717" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDAi~Y Ei)tTCAT1OX AMENI)MENTS 1339 Tile ~ourts have required districts to take such action even prior to tile Supreme Court decision in 1954. Where districts are still operating small, inadequate, segregated schools for Negroes, it has been recommended that these schools be closed and that the stu- dents and teachers be assigned on a nonracial basis. The courts have similarly required the closing of small, inadequate Negro schools. We would not be carrying out the spirit of Title VI if we did not suggest to school districts what steps they could take to meet their obligations. Districts are urged to come up with their own plans if our recommendations appear in- appropriate to them. Over 600 desegregation plans have been reviewed for the current school year. As of now, approximately 100 of these plans have been found ineffective to elimi- nate the dual school system. In approximately one-fourth of these districts there is absolutely no desegregation of any description. All students and faculty continue to attend schools traditionally serving their race. Recommendations of the staff were rejected by these districts, which also refused to submit alterna- tive desegregation plans. The Department was left with no alternative but to offer these districts an opportunity for hearing. In many other communities throughout the South, school officials and local community leaders have made substantial progress toward the elimination of dual school systems. Despite the difficulties connected with the operation of free choice plans, there are instances where they have worked effectively to desegregate schools. The key tu success is the willingness of local shool officials and opinion leaders to develop an atmosphere which will lead to significant progress toward estab- lishing a single school system for all children. In addition to the seven or eight hundred districts that were advised last fall that they had made satisfactory progress and were in compliance with Title VI, other districts whose performance was inadequate have negotiated additional desegregation steps which brought them into compliance. For instance, one Georgia district has operated two segregated schools, one fi' Negro students with Negro teachers, the other for white students with white teachers. 1-lowever. this district has now agreed to transfer the entire Negro eighth grade class to the white school in September 1987 and to assign three full-time teachers across racial lines for the 1967-68 season. As a result, 10 }erc(Iit of the Negro students in the district will be attending (lesegregated sCh(P( Is next year. This case was recently the subject of a news column in the 4th,nta (~on.stjtu- tioJ( 1fl(l, with the permission of the Chairman, I would like to submit a copy of it to he inserted in the record at this point. `lThiis far. 50 districts which had made inadequate progress last year or this year an(l had to be cited for fund termination hearings have since come into (`4)lnphialice. Many other districts that would have been cited for hearings took additional corrective measures and thus came into compliance voluntarily. Every effort will continue to be made to encourage districts to follow this course of action. While we must face the fact that 88 percent of the Negro children in 11 South- ecu States continue to attend schools wthose student bodies are all, or nearly all Negro, it is nevertheless the fact that since the adoption and iml}lelnentatioil of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the number of Negro students attend- iiig desegregate(I schools has increased markedly. In 1964 it was 2.25 percent. ~ 1965. 6 percent, and in September 1966, 12 percent. The progress in the six Border States is even more impressive with the dual school system nearly ahhishied in some. In addition, more than half of the districts of the South have made at least a start in faculty desegregation. The object of the Department's civil rights activity is not the termination of Federal funds. Our goal is to assure that no person in the Tnited States be excluded, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, from participation in or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal finamicial assistance. Chairman PERKINS. It has been called to my attention by the mm- oi'ity that it was contemplatecT from the commencement of the heai'- in~s that we would conclude the hearings on this day. PAGENO="0718" 1540 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDITCATION AMENDMENTS It is my understanding that the administration witnesses will be back inasmuch as Mr. Gardner of North Carolina has expressed a desire through minority counsel to quest ion witnesses concerning the guidelines. Therefore. T am going to ask you particular witnesses to come back at 9 :~) a.m. on Monday morning and under no circumstance will we delay the markup of this bill commencing on Tuesday morning. I have always felt that any member who wanted to ask any witiiess a question should have that opportunity. ~\Ir. I)ELnvNBAcK. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. For that reason I want to ask you to come back. Let me thank you all for a good al)pearance here this morning and we appreciate your aPPearance. Chairman PERKINS. Our iiext witness is Supermtendent Bueford Ri sner, superintendent of B at Ii County schools, Owingsville, ky. I appreciate your coining here, Mr. Risner. STATEMENT OF BUEFORD RISNER, SUPERINTENDENT OF BATH COUNTY SCHOOLS, OWINGSVILLE, KY. Mr. RISKER. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, may I express my deep appre(~iarion for the opportunity to appear before you to express the views of the people in our rural eastern Kentucky area on this very important legislation. In my opinion the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 was one of the finest pieces of legislation that has ever been en- acted. It has meant that many children in Bath County are a step nearer equal e(lucational opportunities than they were before. The act had enabled our system t.o purchase some much needed in- structional equipment and materials, library shelving, books, audio- visual materials. et cetera. and has provided us with the services to two remedial reading teachers, a guidance counselor, school health services, with a registered nurse, and 19 teacher aids this year. The man good things about the. act would take too much of your time for me to enumerate. I would like to confine my remarks to some of the frustrations that I and many of my fellow educators have en- countered relative to certain aspects of Federal aid to education and some suggestions for improving the act. 1. The timing of Federal authorizations, appropriations, regula- tions and allocations is not conducive to encouraging logical and me- thoclical planning on the part of local and State school officials. Federal aidi to education could be much more effective if congres- sional authorization patterns and school years could become more compatible. ~. The bulk of Federal funds for education should come to the States under a minimum foundation type of approach that is based on an ol jective formula which would comisider the financial ability of a State to support eclucat ion. ~. All of the Federal funds corn ilig to a State for elementary and secondary education should be routed through the state departments of e(lucatioll. In my opinion there should be no exception to this ap- proach. State (lepaitmeilts of edurat~on are, and necessarily should b~, t1i~ most capal )ie a~encv to work the local school (listricts. PAGENO="0719" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDtCATION AMENDMENTS 1541 4. The basic U.S. Office of Education should be the agency to han- die all funds to be allocated to the State departments of education and they in turn route funds to the local school (listricts. This should in- clude programs such as Headstart that is now handled by the Office of Economic Opportimity. More consideration should be given to the timing of planning and implementation procedures on the part of local districts. Too much time is lost by the time the local school dis- trict is able to begin its program. Most of us are rushed for time and as a result do not do as good a job as we would like if we had more time. 5. Very serious consideration should be given to an aid to construc- tion bill for public elementary and secondary schools. A formula based on need and ability to pay should be considered. In my own. school system. many things that I would like to do under the present act is prohibitive because of lack of buildings or rooms with very little hope of being able to do anything about. it unless we do receive Federal aid to construction. 6. TI U.S. Office of Education should not be reorganized on the regionalization concept. Existing or proposed offices could better serve the cause of education in the area of planning and consultative services to the State departments of education. Much could be done to help strengthen State departments of education. Then they could more effectively carry out the program with the loca.l districts iii co- Ol)eration with the U.S. Office of Educatioii. 7. Federal guidelines and regulations should be developed through more cooperative procedures with the States. rfhere has been a tend- ency by the U.S. Office to establish the guidelines first and then involve State personnel. At this point the States are advised of basic intent, or clarifications, made of already existing guidelines. Certainly in my opinion, Mr. Chairman, this is in reverse. We should be brought in before the act and not after the guidelines have been established. I wish to express the concerns of many other educators that have appeared before this distinguished body in relation to H.R. 6230: 1. Guidelines under which present law is operating should provide more flexibility at the local leve.l giving school authorities in the field greater choice in being able to meet the most pressing needs of the local school district. 2. The new low income factor of $3,000 rather than the previous $2,000-we certainly want to go on record as very strongly encourag- big that this become a part of the new act or as it. is amended-offers opportunities to more of Kentucky and the Nation's youth. It is our hope that title I could be fully financed to the October authorization level of the 89th Congress. ~. It. is further hoped that much excessive paperwork relating to all the act.s could be condensed. This could be realized if data require- ments of the IJ.S. Office, State Department, and local districts could reach a commonality. Marty times we are duplicating much paperwork that. is already con- tained in a previous report. 4. A tremendous additional workload has been forced upon State and local agencies by Public Law 89-10, making it impossible with limited budgets and personnel to ever evaluate the effectiveness of the PAGENO="0720" 1342 ELEMENTARV AND SECONDARY EDTJCATION AMENDMENTS program. Adequate funds are needed for this important function but those should, by all means, be channeled through the State depart- ments of education. 5. Again I wish to express concern over the conflict between school people, who as trained professionals have done an excellent job oper- ati11~l I Iea(l~tart. and the ()!The of Economic Opportunity which seems to fail to understand that readiness is truly a school function. This program should be operated by the U.S. Office of Education through the various State departments of education, where there is always some degree of understanding of the problems, in even the most remote sections of the State. I think this is true even in remote sections of the State. Many school boards are so disturbed by lack of understanding on the part of OEO that some local boards of education and superintendents are ready to give up the Headstart program. This could only hurt the children who so desperately need this ex- perience. As an additional point here. I would like to state that even my own local board of education is expressing great concern at this point as to the continuation of the Headstart under the Office of Economic Op- portunity. I could go on and elaborate a little further on this but I think what I have is sufficient at this point. 6. Much concern is being expressed by education over the proposed cut in NDEA, title III, funds which are earmarked for title `ST, ESEA. It is further hoped that the fiscal year 1968 appropriation bill will be no less than the fiscal year 1967 funding level. We feel title III of ESEA has been a very important part of our school programs. 7. Much concern is being expressed by education over the new pro- posal, part B of title V, relating to "Grants for Comprehensive Edu- cation Planning and Evaluation" in that it does not meet the avowed needs of State depatments of education. As an aside to the issue, the $15 million request is exorbitant if con- templated just for planning purposes. This proposed financing would probably have more far-reaching effect in developing better educa- tional programs in departments of education if it were added to part A, same title, with a requirement that a portion be utilized specifically for additional planning and evaluative elements. I would like to add at this point, if we continue to plan and never implement the things that we plan in our programs, then I can't see much value in planning if it ends at that point. Truly this is where much of it is ending. It is my sincere belief that if we are to implement new programs in education that are desperately needed that additional classrooms are going to be needed. We. must face this fact, I think, from the Federal, State, and local standpoint. You cannot innovate or improve educational programs if you don't have someplace to house them. Most (listriets in our area have bonded to their limit and yet in many cases we cannot take full advantage of the provision of ESEA of 1~(h~ because of our lack of rooms. It is my wish that a partner- ship attack on the construction needs by local, State and Federal that these needs could be met. PAGENO="0721" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1543 Certainly the aid received has had a tremendous effect on our local school system, and I am sure this has been true throughout the Nation. In conclusion I wish to express the gratitude of the people I repre- sent to this committee for the work you have already done in behalf of better education and for the privilege of appearing before you. Thank you for the invitation to appear before the committee and our esteemed chairman from Kentucky. I feel deeply honored that I have been able to present my statements on education. If the committee has any questions you would like to direct to me I would be glad to answer them to the best of my ability. I would just like to add one aside that is not in my text, that much concern is expressed over the many applications for grants, for studies which range from school dropouts to you name it, much of the studies never reach the proper authorities and by this I mean the legally constituted bodies in the States from the State department of education down to the local districts. Many of these studies are fine, they are very impressive, but they end up on somebody's shelf collecting dust and as a result. nothing ever comes of them. Chairman PERKINS. We were hoping that through titles III and IV that we could get that expertise and the quality of the educational programs in the classroom within a reasonable period of time and eliminate that idea that all good things stay on the shelf and fail to reach the classroom. Mr. RISNER. Mr. Chairman, I might add yesterday I talked to Mr. Samuel Alexander, our deputy superintendent, of construction, and I have been extensively involved in region 7 of title III. I have served on a number of committees. We are developing an instrument which for many reasons we chose to call an evaluation of school systems in the 18-county area. of which I am sure. you are familiar. Chairman PERKINS. Your county is participating in that title III program? Mr. RISNER. Yes, sir; in fact I have spent many. many hours work- ing with this group. It is a fine group, to be sure, but Mr. Chairman, the thing that most disturbs me is the fact that there is no liaison between this group; namely, the East Kentucky Development Corp. and the State department of education. Chairman PERKINS. Do you mean no liaison between your title III group and the State department of education? Mr. RISNER. Yes, sir; that was stated to me yesterday by Mr. Alexander himself. (Discussion off the record.) Chairman PERKINS. Let me sa.y to you, Mr. Risner, I think you are doing an outstanding job as county school superintendent of Bath County, Ky. I have been watching you since you became a county school superintendent and I am delighted to receive the evaluation that you have placed on the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. and that you have been able to receive reniedial instructional materials, library books, audiovisual materials, reniedial reiding teachers and special guidance counselors, and other special help that you would not. otherwise have received. Undoubtedly the program has some drawbacks but from your evalu- ation of the program you can see tremeiidous results in your county, can you? 75-492----4~7-pt. 2-46 PAGENO="0722" 1544 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY ED~TCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. RIsNER. Certainly; yes, sir. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much. Thank you very much for your appearance here this morning. Mr. R.ISNER. I appreciate the opportunity to be before. this body to express my views, sir, and I thank you for your compliment as to my work. I will assure you that. I will continue to try to improve, the educa- tional standards for the students in our county. Chairman PERKINS. Let me state for the record I am delighted that our next witnesses appear here at Congressman Scheuer's request. lVlien Congressnian Scheuer became a. member of the general sub- committee that had jurisdiction over the ESEA, he was most help- ful in arriving at the legislation and his deep interest in all educa- tional activities have conie to the attention of this committee on the day since he was assigned to this committee. I am proud to call upon Congressman Scheuer, who in my judgment is one of the very outstanding Members of the Congress and a Mem- ber who has his district, at heart. on all occasions, to introduce the witnesses. Congressman Scheuer. Mr. SCHEUER. Mr. Chairman, I deeply appreciate those words. I was very eager to serve on your subcommittee last year on the Ele- mentary and Secondary Education. During the long month in which I was able to be on the. committee, I enjoyed attending the sessions and enjoyed working under your leadership. It was a grea.t and most instructive experience, and I am happy to serve under your leader- ship now. I am glad to welcome t.o this hearing three outstanding people in the field of education; first, Garda W. Bowman, of Bank Street College and second, Mrs. Pam Levin and Mrs. Margaret Benjamin, of the Citizens Committee for Children. These. two institutions are preeminent in New York for t.heir deep concern for disadvantaged children and secondly and just as impor- tant for the high sense of professionalism and hardheaded scholarly background as well as practical experience which is the foundation for their work. Both of these institutions and the individuals here made magnifi- cent. contril)UtiOIiS to education in New York and I am very happy to welcome them here today. Dr. Bowman. would you start. off and give us a short word about your background an(l experience in this field and then give us your testimony with the knowledge that your prepared testimony will be made. a part of the record. I assume there is no objection. and you may speak and elaborate as `von see. fit. (The document referred to follows :`~ TESTIMONY BY GARDA W. BOWMAN. PROGRAM CooRDINAToR, SPECIAL PROJECTS. BANK STREET COLLEGE OF EDUCATION Ladies and Gentlemen: I am most grateful to Chairman Perkins for this oppor- tunitv to present some observations regarding the legislative implications of the testimony of President ~ohn H. Niemeyer of Bank Street College of Educa- tiun and his colleagues before this Committee on March 15, 1967. PAGENO="0723" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1545 At that time, President Niemeyer, Dean Gordon Kolpf, and Mrs. Verona Wil- liams, representing Bank Street College of Education, stressed the need for more systematic, coordinated planning and evaluation of the educational enter- lirise at all levels and in all its facets. They placed particular emphasis upon the critical need for planning for the more effective training and utilization of auxiliary personnel (nonprofessionals) in education. President Niemeyer stated that auxiliary personnel had revealed a capacity to make a positive contribution to the learning-teaching process in 15 demonstra- tion programs coordinated by Bank Street College of Education for the Office of Economic Opportunity in 1966. The findings of this nation-wide Study mdi- (ate that such an outcome is facilitated when the planning includes (1) flexi- bility and imagination in role development, (2) training of both professionals and nonprofessionals, and (3) institutionalization of this program into the school structure as a New Career, rather than as a temporary expedient. Speaking as Coordinator of the Bank Street College Study of Auxiliary School Personnel, and after consultation with President Niemeyer and Dean Klopf, I should like to niake the following specific reconlinenilations for legislative action which would, we believe, serve to enhance the effectiveness of auxiliary per- SOliliel in school systems, and thus have a significant impact upon the educa- tional enterprise in its totality. I. That there be an Anieniliiiejit to Title I of the Eleinentai'v and See- (indar Education Act requiring the submission of a plan for training aux- iliary personnel and the professionals with whom they work by all school systeiiis which request funds under this title for the eniplovnicnt of aux- iliary Personnel. 2. That there be an Amendment to the Higher Educatioti Act for the granting of funds to selected colleges of teacher education to con(luc't ilemojistration faculty workshops oIl the new 011(1 lucre Coml)lex role of the teacher as one who orchestrates all available resources (professional 1(1 ni n~ ri ifessi, nat to liieet the leo rning iieeds of Ijupils. 3. That the proposed Amendment of Title V of the Elementary and See- 011(10 cv Education Act on Comprehensive Educational Planning (which has been presented for the Coiisiileriition of this Committee) be strengthened by the inclusion of specific reference to the granting of funds for Regional Planning Conferences on the Role Development, Training and Institutional- ization of Auxiliary Personnel in American Education-such conferences to include school administrators, teacher educators, teachers, auxiliaries, and parents as well as representatives of professional organizations and Com- munity action agencies. These Regional Conferences would be more pm- ductive if a "jive-year program of continuous grants" were to be established, as suggested in the prol)osed Amendment to Title V now Tinder considera- tion by your Committee. 4. That funds be made available for a White House Conference on "New Careers in the Public Service", with sections devoted to the training and utilization of auxiliary personnel in various areas of human service, in- cluding education, health, welfare, corrections, safety and law- enforcement. In support of these recommendations, I append herewith some specific illus- trations of the need for such action, drawn from the findings of the Bank Street College Study of Auxiliary Personnel in Education. In conclusion, ladies and gentlemen, I wish to express my own appreciation and that of my colleagues for your concern regarding the need for comprehensive, systematic and con- tinuing planning and evalution of education. STATEMENT OF DR. GARDA W. BOWMAN, PROGRAM COORDINATOR, SPECIAL PROJECTS, BANK STREET COLLEGE OF EDUCATION Mrs. BOWMAN. Thank you, Congressman Sclieuer. I 0111 most grateful to Chairman Perkins, to Congressman Scheuer and to the other members of the committee for this opportunit-v to reinforce, and amplify the comments of my colleagues, President John H. Neimeyer and Dean Gordon Klopf who testified before this committee on March 15. Both colleague.s stressed the need for planning and supporting the PAGENO="0724" 1546 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS proposed amendment to title V to provide for comprehensive plan- ning with emphasis upon the planning for effective utilization of auxiliary personnel. I speak to that point particularly as coordi- natory of a nationwide study which Bank Street College is conduct- ing of Th demonstration training programs for nonprofessionals in school systems throughout the country. Mr. ScilEurli. Whh is the sponsor of that? Mrs. Bo\v3IAx. The funds are provided by the Office of Economic Opportunity. We have just been refunded for another year and are starting with seven additional projects one of which is in eastern Kentucky, Mr. Perkins. Moorehead Fniversity is the local sponsor and will develop piesenvice and inservice training in four counties in eastern Kentucky. I thought you might he interested to know that we are concerned with your area and that we expect to get great results from our analy- sis of the programs there. I am not confining my remarks to the written testimony for two reasons: One. I wante(l to get a little more quickly to the gist of what I hoped to say to you and, two, because I would like to keep this testi- moiiy open since, as I have been sitting here- Chairman PERKINS. Without objection all of your prepared state- ment will be inserted in the record and you may proceed any way you choose to. Mrs. BOWMAN. I would like to submit later some substituted mate- rial. Chairman PE1~1iIxs. Without objection, you may do so. (The document referred to follows:) ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE NEED FOR COMPREHENSIVE, SYSTEMATIC AND CONTINUING PLANNING OF EDUCATION AT ALL LEVELS On March 15, 1967, John H. Niemeyer, President of Bank Street College of Education, stated before the Committee on Education and Labor of the I-louse of Representatives in Washington, l).C. that: `Preiiminary findings from the analysis of 15 demonstratiOn training programs for auxiliary school personnel reveal that such personnel demonstrate a capacity to make a positive contribution to the learning-teaching process, when the fol- lowing conditions prevail: "1. When the roles for aides are developed in terms of the particular strengths of each aide and the particular needs of the pupils of particular classrooms, rather than the roles being defined in rigid categories which are supposed to apply to all situations. "2. When intensive and continuing training is provided, both for the non- professionals and for the professionals with whom they work. 3 When the job of the auxiliary personnel is incorporated in the entire school structure as a new and respected career, and not merely as a tempo- rary expedient. "4. When the school and the school system look upon all members of staff, from the building custodian to the top superintendent, as being part of an educational team which is constantly influencing the lives of the young." The following material is illustrative of these four points. It is drawn from a Study of Auxiliary Personnel in Education. coinhicted by Bank Street College of Education for the Office of Economic Opportunity. 1) Role Development: In one state where a deiiionstratiOfl program was con- ducted. rigid categories were defined by state legislation which were to apply to the utilization of nonprofessionals in all school situations. As a result, non- professionals were not allowed to monitor pupils on buses, and the bus drivers had to take their attention from the road to maintain quiet in the bus. in this same program, a third grade student was observed helping his classmates check PAGENO="0725" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY ED1~CATIOX AMENDMENTS 1547 the correctness of "yes' and "no" answers to an objective test, using the teacher's answer book. An aide, who was a high school graduate, stood by, not permitted. to perform this function. In another program, where there was more flexibility about role and functionr some of the auxiliaries were used as monitors and sonie were not. In one case, for example, a young Negro man had established such a "buddy-buddy" rela- tionship with the Negro boys in the class to which he had been assigned as an auxiliary that his control of the group was weakened, but this same young man proved to be a tremendous asset to the program when he visited the boys' homes in truancy cases. The teacher, diagnosing both the needs of the pupils and the special contribution this particular auxiliary was then capable of making, de- veloped his role imaginatively and with tangible pupil outcome. 2) Training: In New York City, a pilot training program for auxiliary school personnel has been established in District 3. Mrs. Verona Williams who testified before your Committee on March 15, serves as an auxiliary in that district, and because of her understanding of and involvement in the goals of school provides important linkage between school and community in the area. Mrs. Williams is an unusually fine and intelligent person but she illustrates the kind of school- community cooperation which is possible and which training may encourage. In another district of the city, where such training is not yet available a super- visor commented thus about the situation: "There is a tremendous need for in service training of well-motivated aids so that they can profit from `process of observation and feedback' and so that they will understand the need to improve on the job. The biggest problem with the employment of indigenous auxiliary personnel is that of human relations. The following occur daily and become dynamite in any school: a. Gossiping to the community b. Overprotection of the aides' own children c. Tendency to be harsher than necessary to nonconforming children d. Tendency to complain about children who have problems e. Tendency to ignore time schedules and to expect special consideration for their own problems f. Development of friction between paid school aides and other parents" 3) Institutionalization: In some of the demonstration programs, a firm and honest commitment by the local school system to employ the auxiliaries after successful completion of the training program could not be implemented when budgetary changes required a cut-back in the employment of auxiliaries. This resulted in the ultimate frustration for a few of the trainees who had been motivated to train for jobs which did not exist. However, when the local school system had incorporated the use of nonprofes- sionals as an integral part of the school structure, the result was not only stable employment but the opportunity for upward mobility. For example, in Puerto Rico, where there was strong commitment to this pro- gram by the Department of Education, and where the ITniversity of Puerto Rico u-as involved in the planning, not only was every auxiliary-trainee in the Sum- mer Institute employed when the school year began but they are all now enrolled in a work-study program at the University of Puerto Rico. leading to the J)OS- sihility of promotion and eventually, it is hoped, to achieving professional status. In Detroit, another school system which has incorporated this program as a permanent part of the school structure, a career ladder has been established with five job titles and job descriptions, and appropriate salaries, increments and fringe benefits for each step on the ladder. President Niemeyer's final comment on the conditions which contribute to the effective utilization of auxiliary personnel was concerned with a broad approach to education-that is, perceiving all staff members, from the building custodian to the top superintendent as being part of the educational team. Such an approach cannot be described in quantitative terms. It reinforces the concept that like life the organization of education includes a variety of roles, adult influences and common experiences-all of which have an impact on the development of chil- dren and youth. This concept seeme~! to permeate the 1'S demonstration pro- grams. ~[r~ T~nw-~j- -~- T tini ~r'~flo' to addres~ myself to sonic le.slative action in the. field of auxiliary personnel or nonprofessional in edu- cation for con~~(leratjon l)\~ tim i~ auii-ust iiodv. The demonstration of PAGENO="0726" 154S ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS the l~ programs to which I referred revealed that nonprofessionals do have a capacity to make a positive contribution to the learning-teach- ing process when adequate training is provided, when there is a flexible attitude toward the function that may be performed by nonprofes- sionals and when the utilization of nonprofessionals is incorporated into the whole strneture as a permanent. stable career ladder rather than as a temporary expedient. We hel ~eve that hese ~oals crc important not only to the utilization of auxiliary personnel but to the whole educational enterprise. Bas- ing our recommendations on the findings from this study~ we have five sn estions to make for specific legislative action which hopefully you will find worthy of your consideration. The first is that when funds are made available under title I of the ESEA to a local school system for the employment of auxiliary personnel, there he a reauirement that an adequate plan for training of these personnel as well as the professionals with whom they work would have to he submitted and approved by the agency granting the fund so as to avoid the problem we sea so frequently of auxibaries heinz employed without training for those who are about to use the auxiliary personnel. We have seen teachers say to auxiliaries. "Sit over there and wait until I have an errand for you to do," instead of utilizing what, we believe to he a tremendous potential for education, because the profes- sionals li~d not h'~r'n trained. We have seen some auxiliaries them- selves trniist~ressin~. trvin~ to take over. ~ros~ipin~ about the school to thc~ coiemiinitv. objectin~r to the kind of discipline that th'~ school operates because they were given no understanding of the goals of the school before they began to work. So we feel that employment without training is a very rlanc~eroiis development, and we urge that a plan for trainintr be required before any additional funds for employment are provided under title T. The second specific recommendation relates to the possibility of re~ional nlaiinin~ conferences retrarding the use of auxiliary person- nel which mie-ht. be made available under the amended title V as s1i~~e~te(l to von and which might be done on a. continuing basis if the reconimendat~oii that title V money he provided on a 5-year basis in~t cad of year by year meets your approval. \Ve believe that if such regional planning conferences on the utiliza- tion and training of auxiliary personnel were established, they should lflCill(le adniinistratois, teacher educators. teachers. auxiliaries, and parents of representatives of professional organizations such as unions and the NEA and indigenous personnel represented on community action agencies. We aiso believe as our third recommendation that there should he fiinci~ for faculty workshops in selected colleges of teacher education. This would probably not fall under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act but more appropriately under the Higher Education Act, hut unless teachers understand their expanding role in a broader, basic approach to education, we will not have effective utilization of the people who help the teachers. PAGENO="0727" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1549 Teachers in the past have thought of their role as confined to the interaction with pupils alone rather than including the function of orchestrating other people in the classroom and of utilizing all avail- able services, human and technological, to meet the needs of the pupils which they have identified. So we urge that funds for the training of faculty in this broad ap- proach to education be provided. Fourth, we urge and reinforce the recommendation that I believe has been made to this august~ body by other groups, that funds be made available for a White House Conference on the Ftihization of Auxiliary Personnel, or, shall we say, human service aids in gen- eral with a section on education as well as sections for welfare, health, corrections, law enforcement, and the like. rfhe fifth and I believe perhaps the most important~ of our legisla- tive recommendations deals with the approach that has already been made in the Senate by Senator Nelson who has filed a bill, S. 721, which was introduced 011 *January 3u, lOG?, is entitled ~A bill to encourage the developnient of teacher aid programs in the schools of the Nation." We believe after careful analysis of this bill that it is an excellent document. We hope that somebody on your committee will see fit to introduce this bill into the House with perhaps two additions, or two areas where the present bill might be strengthened. In the section which lists the requirements for approval of project applications for the training and employment of nonprofessionals or teacher aids there is referenc.e to the fact that this should be part. of a compreheiisive program for improved utilization of educational per- sonnel in schools where the teacher aids are to serve. Now this may be interpreted to mean that this would be more than just an opportunity for jobs at the entry level but~ that a comprehen- sive program would eiitail a step-by-step career ladder with job titles, job classifications, salary increment, and the opportunity for upward mobility. Mr. SCHEUER. That would include on-the-job training? Mrs. Bow~L~N. Yes, a comprehensive ~)1ogram would iiielude that. However, in the bill, training is taken out and referred to in another section. I hope that when and if you decide to introduce, this bill into the 1-louse you would strengthen section 3. item No. 2 in reI~a1(i to a conhh)rehensive program so that it would include opportunity for up- ward `nobility. The other section which it seems to us would benefit by some more specific and strong language does relate to training- Chairman PERKINS. I think your comments and recommendations are excellent. Mr. SCHEUER. May I ask unanimous consent that the bill be incor- porated in this record. (The document referred to follows:) PAGENO="0728" 1550 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS [S. 721, 90th Cong., 1st sess.] A BILL To encourage the development of teacher aid programs in the schools of the Nation Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatires of tile United States of America in Congress assem~bled, That this Act may be cited as the "Teacher Aid Program Support Act of 1967". AIJTIIORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS SEC. 2. There are authorized to be appropriated $50,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1908, $100,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1969,. and $150,000,000 each for the fiscal year ending June 3, 1970, and for the two succeeding fiscal years, to enable the Commissioner of Education to make grants to local e(lucational agencies and institutions of higher education to assist them~ in carrying Out projects for the development of teacher aid programs provided for in applicatioiis approved under this Act. APPROVAL OF PROJECT APPLICATIONS SEC. 3. (a) The Commissioner may approve an application for a project un- der this Act only if the application is submitted jointly by a local educational agency and an institution of higher education and if he determines that- (1) the project is designed to provide a combined program of training and experience to prepare persons to serve as teacher aids in preschool and elementary and secondary education programs; (2) the project is part of a comprehensive program for improved utiliza- tion of educational personnel in schools where the teacher aids are to serve; (3) the project is designed to provide more individualized attention for students and to relieve teachers and other professional staff of functions which can be perfrnied competently by teacher aids under the supervision of professional staff: (4) the institution of higher education participating in the project will undertake to provide preservice training programs to prepare persons to become teacher tids and to provide, to the extent practicable, preservice programs bringing together teacher aids and the teachers and other edu- cational personnel who will he supervising them: t5) the institution of higher education and the local educational agency participating in each project have satisfactory plans for maintaining co- operative arrangements throughout the three-year duration of the project in order to relate inservice and summer training programs to the work experience of the teacher aids in the schools; (0) the local educational agency participating in a project has, prior to the filing of an application under this Act. submitted its plans to the State educa- tional agency for review and has taken into account its recommendations in developing the proposal for the project; and (7) the project is of sufficient scope and quality to provide reasonable assurance of making substantial improvements in the educational programs of the schools participating in the project. (Ti) A school whbh has participatedl for a total of three years in an approved project receiving Federal payments under this Act shall not be eligible to par- ticipate thereafter in any further project assisted under this Act. FEDERAL PAYMENTS Si:c. 4. (a) The Commissioner shall (in advance or otherwise) pay to the local educational agency and the institution of higher education jointly carrying out each project approved under this Act such portion of the costs of the project as each of the joint applicants incurs under the terms of the grant. (b) For purposes of this section. the costs of the project covered by the Fed- eral grant include all of the costs of training programs for teacher aids and for teachers and other professional staff members supervising teachers aids, includ- ing appropriate stipends; and the Federal grant shall cover not to exceed 75 per centuni of the costs of the project attributable to compensation to be paid to teacher aids while serving in the programs of the schools of the local educa- tional agency participating in the project. Federal payments toward the costs: of the project may not cover any compensation for any teacher or professional staff member employed by the local educational agency. PAGENO="0729" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1551 APPORTIONMENT AMONG STATES SEC. 5. From the sums appropriated to carry out this Act for each fiscal year, the Commissioner shall apportion to each State an amount which bears the same ratio to such sums as the number of children aged three to seventeen, inclusive, in the State bears to the number of such children in all the States. To the extent that it is determined by the Commissioner that the amount apportioned by any State will not be required for grants in that State, such amount shall be avail- able for grants in other States able to use additional grants pursuant to this Act. Such amounts for any year shall be apportioned among such other States on the same basis as the original apportionment for such year. DEFINITIONS SEC. 6. As used in this Act- (a) The term "teacher aid" means assistant to teachers, library aids, school, recreation aids and other ancillary educational personnel who are under the supervision of professional members of the school staff, but the term does not include persons who are primarily responsible for the instruction of pupils. (b) The term "local educational agency" means a public board of education or other public authority legally constituted within a State for either adminis- trative control or direction of, or to perform a service function for I)Ul)lic' do- mentary or secondary schools in a city, county, township, school district, or other political subdivision of a State, or such combination of school districts or counties as are recognized in a State as an administrative agency for its public elementary or secondary schools. Such term also includes any other public institution or agency having administrative control and direction of a public elementary or secondary school. (c) The term "institution of higher education" means an educational insti- tution in any State which (1) admits as regular students only persons having a certificate of graduation from a school providing secondary education, or the recognizeti equivalent of such certificate, (2) is legally authorized within such State to provide a program of education beyond secondary education, (3) pro- vides an educational program for which it awards a bachelor's degree or pro- vides not less than a two-year program which is acceptable for full credit toward such a degree, (4) is a public or other nonprofit institution, and (5) is accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency or association approved by the Commissioner for this purpose or, if not so accredited, (A) is an institution with respect to which the Commissioner has determined that there is satis- factory assurance, considering the resources available to the institution, the period of time, if any, during which it has operated, the effort it is making to meet accreditation standards, and the purpose for which this determination is being made, that the institution will meet the accreditation standards of such an agency or association within a reasonable time, or (B) is an institution whose credits are accepted on transfer by not less than three institutions which are so accredited, for credit on the same basis as if transferred from an institution so accredited. If t.he Commissioner (leternhines that a particular category of such schools does not meet the requirements of clause (5) because there is no nationally recognized accrediting agency or association qualified to accredit schools in such category, he shall, pending the establishment of such an accrediting agency or association, appoint an advisory committee, composed of persons specially qualified to evaluate training provided by schools in such category, which shall (i) prescribe the standards of content, scope, and quality which must be met in order to qualify schools in such category to participate in teacher aid programs under this Act, and (ii) determine whether particular schoolE not meeting the requirements of clause (5) meet those standards. For purposes of this subsection, the Commissioner shall publish a list of nationally recognized accrediting agencies or associations which he determines to be reliable authority as to the quality of training offered. (d) The term "State educational agency" means the State board of education or other agency or officer primarily responsible for the State supervision of public elementary and secondary schools, or, if there is no such officer or agency, an officer or agency designated by the Governor or by State law. (e) The term "State" includes, in addition to the several States of the Union, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico. Wake Island, Guam, American Samoa, the Virgin Islands, and the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands. FEDERAL CONTROL OF EDUCATION PROHIBITED SEC. 7. Nothing contained in this Act shall be construed to authorize any depart- ment, agency, officer, or employee of the United States to exercise any direc- PAGENO="0730" 1552 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTATION AMENDMENTS tion. supervision, or control over the curriculum, program of instruction, administration, or personnel of any educational institution or school system, or over the selection of library resources, textbooks, or other printed or pub- lished instructional materials by any educational institution or school system. Mr'~. Bow\r~~x. ~-~ect ion 4 indicates that the institution of higher edu- cation part icipating in the project will undertake to provide pre- service training programs to prepare persoi~s to become teacher aides and to provide preservice programs bringing together teacher aides and the teachers and other educational personnel who will be super- vising them. I would like to see this strengthened because just bringing people together does not necessarily mean that they will be given the kind of orientation that is necessary in order to work together. I believe that this could be strengthened by indicating that there would be preservice training both of the auxiliary personnel and of the teachers with whom they are to work and other profes- sionals in terms of the new roles and relationships that are required of them. I would also hope that this would continue under inservice train- ing and be. a continuous operation rather than limited to an orienta- tion period only. 1 want. to put our strong support behind the bill w-hic.h does provide for a long-range program and does provide ample funds to demon- strate and provide the services that are needed. Mr. SCIIEUER. 1 am working with Senator Nelson's office and I am very much interested in your recommendations for improving and for fortifying the bill: they will be included in the form in which it is introduced in the house. Mrs. Bo\vMAx. Thank von very much. In conclusion I would like to refer back to Mr. Risner's comment that often research simply gathers dust somewhere iii a file. I am happy to report that. we were urged to prepare an interim report, and distribute it. throughout the country. I show you a copy of the report which we prepared which was sent to superintefl(lents of schools employnig teacher aids under title I programs. to deans of colleges of teacher education. We distributed 25,000 copies of this report, but we have had requests for 4.000 more copies for distribution, and, in addition, approximately 1.000 people have asked for the supplementary materials witicli de- scribe each of the 15 programs and provide some suggested models for tranhing and utilization of auxiliary pei~soi11~el. I have copies of these profiles plus a composite picture of all of the programs we have been observing and analyzing. Mr. ScilEvEru. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask unanimous consent that those supplementary reports be placed in the record immediately followin~ the main report which was placed in the record the other day. Chair~nan PERKINs. Without objection it is so ordered. Mr. STEIGER. May I ask Dr. Bowman whether or not for the commit- tee any of t.hose copies might be available? Mrs. Bow~rAx. Let. me say that we did send copies to this entire committee of the first 10 profiles about a month ago, but it was before PAGENO="0731" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTCATIOX AMENDMENTS 1553 this hearing and it probably was snowed under by much of the mail that you receive. W hen I)r. Niemevei alal Dr. Klopf reported to us on March 1~ that you did not have this material, we sent you the five new profiles and inclicat-ed that if you wished to have the first 10 which had already been seilt to the members of the committee, we would be happy to send a repeat order. rfIlis went out on Thursday air mail special delivery to all of you. Chairman PERKINS. We will withhold any questions until all of you ladies have had a chance to make a general statement. STATEMENT OF MRS. NATHAN W. LEVIN, CHAIRMAN OF THE EDU- CATIONAL SERVICES SECTION OF THE CITIZENS COMMITTEE FOR CHILDRE1~ STATEMENT OF MRS. NATHAN W. LEVIN, CHAIRMAN OF THE EDUCATIONAL SERVICES SECTION, CITIZENS' COMMITTEE FOE CHILDREN OF NEW YORK, INC. Your Committee plays a decisive role in establishing the educational pattern for present and future generations. Citizens' Committee for Children, a com- munity agency which has for twenty years worked for the improvement of New York City's educational system, is honored to appear before you. We hope that you will exercise to the fullest the power that the Congress has invested in you to assure that the resources of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 are used to provide the greatest benefit to those whom it was enacted to help. We believe that amendments are needed if this goal is to be reached. You have been examining how present appropriations have been used-whether for `add on" programs or whether the emphasis has been put on programs to create change in education. We share with you the opinion that the legislative intent of the Congress was not that ESEA serve as general aid to pay for "more of the same" by simply relieving states, counties, cities, towns and local school boards of their financing problems. We realize, of course, that these local gov- ernmental units are hard-pressed financially with a narrowing tax base, but we also know that federal aid to education was not designed to solve this prob- lem. We fear that this message has failed to reach lay boards of education throughout the land. Our close observations of Title I programs in New York City leave little doubt in our minds that almost all the money has been used for general support of the school system. In the two years of Title I operation in New- York City. approximately twenty percent of the total has been allocated for the reor~anizafjon of ~rade levels to a -1 4-4 svsteln. This reorgittiizatjoii JUts been inatolated as a way to effect racial balance in the schools hr the New York State Depaitinent of Education in 1 ~ before ESEA existed. But when ESEA nione was made available, S~S million went for this purpose-the lar~rest se~uiient (.~1 ~`M million ) for the creation of Comprehensive High Schools, whose actual inception lS Dot yet scheduled, The funnelling of this money for routine school expenses seems to us inappropriate and a deliberate misreading of the educational intent of Title I that you wrote into the law. That infusions of federal aid are needed may not be disputed, but it is a cruel hoax upon the children of the poor that these funds are used to maintain and strengthen the system that has failed to educate them. It is not the children who need remediation, but the system. Our present course suggests that if the prescription fails, we throw the patient out. It is obvious that the only redress is legislative. Accordingly, we appear be- fore you to express our hope that you will be hold enough to mandate needed changes in th~ Act to communicate unmistakably that the legislative intent is to break with old patterns wherever they no longer are useful. We are aware that the local educational agencies raise the spectre of federal domination and that this properly gives pause to some legislators. But urban America, particularly the largest cities, cannot wait for concensus among edu- cators as they veer from crisis to crisis, half-paralyzed by the fear that their autonomy will be destroyed. As we have observed ESEA in New York City, and particularly Title I, the following legislative mandates seem necessary to us: PAGENO="0732" 1354 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1. We ask that you mandate that changes in budgeted program amounts approved for funding by the Office of Education exceeding 10% of their orig- inal budget be resubmitted through the same approval cycle. The appended list of New York City's Title I projects shows the comparison of the original budget as passed in a public hearing and two subsequent modifications made without public review. Projects were modified up to 400% from the original allocation. These comparisons were obtained only by extensive digging in the records of the Board of Education, since no procedures for review of modifications exist in the system. Such administrative changes, remote from public scrutiny, we understand to be widespread throughout the country. 2. We ask that you strengthen the role of community participation in planning in order to provide at least some checkpoints on Title I allocations. The present loose consultative relationships of the New York City Board of Education and the Council Against Poverty are ludicrously insufficient to relate planning for Title I to other educational projects and they make a mockery of community involvement and comprehensive planning. They invite deception on the part of the Board of Education and are, therefore, potentially dangerous. 3. We ask that you make explicit the functional relationships between the several Titles of the Act. particularly Titles I and III. It is our hope that sonic of the innovative spirit of Title III might find its way more easily into the school systems. through the cross-fertilization of shared ideas from educators and the communities together. 4. We ask for amendments to render the required evaluations of Title I projects meaningful. The Act states that evaluations must be made, not that they be utilized in future planning. In New York City this year, proj- ects were recycled before last year~s evaluations were submitted. To be made more useful, evaluations should have built into them alternatives and the recommendations of the evaluator. What is now an expensive exercise should be made a function to provide service to local school boards having the responsibility for making policy based on experience. American busi- ness would not survive if its consultants did not supply management with alternatives after reviewing the efficacy of programs. 5. We ask that you mandate 15% of funds for innovative projects to be set aside for retraining and orientation of new staff for the goals of the new programs. We think it would be fruitful to explore training possibilities out- side the schools. In-service training now often amounts simply to the trans- mission of outmoded skills and the perpetuation of ineffective methods. 6. We ask that you reinforce other new legislation calling for the creation of noii-professionitl career ~`ve1opr1iF~I1t by amendiinr tlw \ct P1 (over train- ing and salaries for indigenous personnel. Under ESEA, they are presently limited solely to custodial tasks-hall duty. cafeteria duty. yard duty-with the substitution of federal for local funding being the only change. We think it essential to evolve new- roles and new training vehicles to produce clear non-professional development lines for paid classroom auxiliaries. We need also to provide education for the classrooiii teacher to understand and to accept such help as an adjunct to his ow-n professionalism. Federal aid under ESEA amounts to over 7% of New York City's school expense budget. but its potential. intended by Congress to cause profound change in the system has thus far not been realized. A great deal of federal money has been poured into the system. Two years of experielice have demonstrated that money alone-without the creation of new approaches and new skills-will not lead to better education for those children whose shocking educational neglect led to the enactment of Title I. We strongly believe that the training of adults, both as neighborhood classroom aides amid a~ tealiers trained lii the dynamics (If clmanmre will have the longest- lasting effect upon our schools. The children of the year 2000 will thank you for the quality upgrading of the system they will inhermt. We have given you as succinctly as pessible our suggested amendments to the Elementary and secondary Education Act of 19G5. We have other less critical chanres to reconimend about the (lay-to-day operation of ESEA in New York City and the role of the State Education Departments which have failed to transmit the directive for change. We reserve these for further exploration and discus- sion with ~OU. ESEA has failed so far in the largest city in America. with the largest Title I appropriation--where one might expect leadership, boldness, and a great sense of PAGENO="0733" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS 1555 urgency in view of its school problems reported daily in the press. Despite wide- spread community insistence upon the development of a comprehensive plan for the children in close to 900 public schools and 200 non-public schools participating in Title I proiects, the pleas fall oii deaf ears. If the present drift continues with- out legislative clarification, it will be difficult to determine the effect of appropri- ations of billions of dollars beyond aid to perpetuate 01(1 patterns of failure. L'SL'J allocations foi' 1966-67 Pro)ected .\[orli Modifed I 1966-67 1966-67 1966-67 expense budget budget budget (Oct. 19, (Jan, 31 (July 1, 1966) 1966) 1967) Total ~oH~4~6209937 Prekindergarten 2447 020 2.797.913 44963~ Kindergarten 1.039,503 291, 607 Early childhood coordination__ -- 51 ic; 51 056 o~. 078 Alter school study centers, elementary 4~5 ~ 485 639 1 990 800 After school study centers, Junior ugh school 593. 552 593. 552 701' 723 After school study centers, coordination 20, 382 20, 382 70, 393 Suninierele~nentary ~ 2,915, 585 2,945, 585 Summer junior high schools~ 234 27 239, 538 239 538 Summer sari dlv maladjusted 54 6(5 315, 587 315 587 Comprehensive high schools, academic ~ 490, 429 6. lOt), 535 6 142 026 Comprehensive high schools, vocational 3. isx. sic 2.926, 62 3. 016: 412 Summer academic high schools~ - 0 354.396 354 396 Suinmnervocational high schools o 06,393 66,393 Summerteacher moms 0 2.334 2,334 Neighborhood \~nuth Corps 0 262,870 262 870 Coordination, comprehensive high schools 20. 392 20. 382 21' 052 Middleschools 3.622,127 4.303.016 4,662,988 Coordination, junior high school, ESEA 20, 382 20, 382 20 382 l'nproved services, elementary 6.611, 769 7. 1, 057 7.508 753 Inproved services. junior high schools special service 1.324 804 1, us, 352 1 843 588 Coordination, elementary, ESEA 20382 20,382 ` 21052 Expanded and improved instructions for socially nialadjusted and emotionally disturbed children, schools 2,345. 525 2. 157, 112 2 187 182 Expanded and improved services for socially maladjusted child, supportive services - - 756958 686,649 714 267 Socially maladjusted, Lincoln Hall - 411, 044 93 555 , Expanded and improved services for socially iii alacljusted and emotionally disturbed child, selected schools - 38o, 603 387, 758 421 667 Transitional schools, elementary 4,576,577 J 4,586,571 4 896 ~59 Transitional schools, junior high school 2,859, 649 2.733,670 2 767 027 Free choice open enrollment, elementary -- 3, 241, 291 3, 162, 515 3 423' 846 Free choice open enrollment, junior high school 1, 675, 161 1, 838, 441 1,960 868 More effective schools 6,394. 020 6.344, 212 6 212 981 Interseholastieathleticprograms 349,462 354,317 354317 Spsech inprove'mientprograui 280,208 311,965 355 352 College discovery program 589,993 998, 840 1 104358 Supervision, child guidance I ~ 114,300 `114300 Sups~vision, edu'stional and vocational guidance 0 54, 710 55310 Curriculm-n development, middle schools 0 211,688 211' 648 Curriculum development, teacher training, career guidance.1 0 46, 366 46' 366 Curriculum development, socially maladjusted 0 47 342 47 34~ Coordination-curriculum development and teacher training, socially maladjusted 0 2,628 2,628 Teacher training, middle schools 0 120, 351 120 351 Preservice training 0 946,447 1,202,791 Preschool child development centers 0 4,275, 631 4 275 631 Educational TV and audiovisual teacher training 0 253, 316 `258 596 Summer in-service training for teaching disadvantaged cliil- dren 0 2,011,945 2 011,945 SUTEC (Queens College) - 0 453, 222 443 3~9 Coordination, nonpublic 0 I 72,030 I 79 695 Art (nonpublic) afterschool 0 424, 660 370,742 Music (nonpublic) after school 0 266, 973 437799 Health education (nonpublic) after school 0 219, 078 311. 780 Library services (nonpublic) after school o s,o~i 2.084 Speech therapy (nonpublic) 0 240,Sm,7 229,400 Speech improvement (nonpublic) 0 67 667 Corrective reading (nonj)ublic) o 1.177, 20 884,755 Evening guidance cenlers 0 2,4as, 7-il 2.888,966 In-school guidance (nonpublic) 0 916.SOc 1.162,202 Corrective mathematics (nonpublic) 0 1, is:, 020 1,334 762 Demonstration and teacher training-speech hnprovemnent (nonpublic) 0 23, 175 23,175 Testing (nonpublic) 0 21, 970 90400 Trip program (nonpublic) 0 54,320 176,890 Curriculuni development, career guidance 0 0 182, 795 Curriculum development and teacher training (600) a o 122,283 PAGENO="0734" 1556 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mrs. LEVIN. Mr. Chairman, Congressman Scheuer, and other mem- bers of the committee, I should like to say on behalf of the citizens' committee that we are honored to be here today and we appreciate and welcome the opportunity to bring to your committee our observations on the use of the funds provided by the Elementary and Secondary Education Actm New York City. We share with you the opinion that these funds were not for the purpose of general aid but rather to provide additioiial moneys which are so essential if we. are going to reach and provide effective educa- tion for our culturally and educationally deprived children. In the testimony which has been distributed to you, we make six points as recommendations for legislative amendments to the Elemen- tary and Secondary Education Act. I should like to amplify to some extent. No. 1. We ask that you mandate that change in budgeted program amounts approved by the Office of Education that exceed 10 percent of their original budget be resubmitted through the same approval procedure. I should like to refer to the appended sheets which will bear out and demonstrate the reason for this suggested amendment. The first column which shows a total of over $50 million represents the final al- location projected in the expense budget as of July 1, 1966, as pre- sented at a public hearing. There were numerous subsequent hearings at which there were frag- mentary considerations of proposals. There was never an opportunity to get a picture of a comprehensive overall plan but, rather. it seemed to u~ a patchwork of bits and pieces without design and without pattern. In December the budget request of the superintendent of schools showed changes reflected as of October 19. These figures are rep- resented in the second column. As of January 31, 1967, by (lint of extensive and intensive digging on the part of our staff, we were able to get from the office of business affairs of the board of education the modified budget figures listed in column 3. A cursory glance alone reveals something rather interesting. Pages 3 and 4 have in the hrst colunm a series of zeros indicating that there had been absolutely no provision made at the outset for these pro- grams. which were added on later without benefit of a comprehensive listing, when it became known that~ more funds would he available. Review indicates that some of the figures that appear in the final column represent increases up to 400 percent. We have been following the prekindergarten programs in New York City and have issued two reports on them dated June 1965 and October 1966 and, therefore. have, a special interest in how funds are expended for early childhood education. May I call your attention to the 1)rekindergarte'fl expenditure. There has been an increase of 80 percent in the original allocation of July 1, 1966. We are de1i~htecl to see increased funds channeled into prekinder- ~arten education because, on the basis of what we have seen, we he- lieve in its potential wholeheartedly. If you will look immediately below uinler `Killdergartell." you will see that the original allocation of ~l ,039.~03 waS eliminated as of .Tcnnary 31, 1967. PAGENO="0735" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1557 It was reduced to a cipher. I should like to refer for a moment and quote from the President's special message to the Congress on health and education in which under special programs for special needs educating poor children, and I will excerpt: Let us begin new efforts like the Headstart, Follow-Through program which can carry forward into the early grades the gains made under Headstart. There is no provision made for ~Fo11ow through" in this budg- etary analysis. As a matter of fact, thence are 50,000 youngsters in New York City who have gone through a prekindergarten program, a Headstart program and are drop outs because there has been no provision for a continuation into kindergarten for t.he.ni. Mr. SCHEUE1i. Do you have any figures on the percentage of chil- dren in New York City or New York State who are eligible for kindergarten-in a State where kindergarten is mandated to be avail- able if a parent wished to place his cllil(l in kindergarten-but who are not there even though their pa.rem~ts prefer that they be there ? Mrs. LEVIN. I do not have it but I can find out. Mr. SCHEUER. Almost half of the children in my district are not. iii kindergarten and I have had repeated reports from parents who have taken their children to kindergarten and are told there are no facili- ties available. Tnder the State law there is a mandate for all children to be in first grade and a mandate for all children to be in kindergarten if their parents so desire. To me this is an outrageous situation. Mrs. LEVIN. We concur absolutely. A further analysis of these figures indicate that the upper grades get a clisproportinate flow of funds and prekindergarten and early childhood education are left short changed. No. 2. WTe ask that you strengthen the role of community partici- pation to provide checkpoints on title I allocations. WThen the veto was eliminated from the original act, the community action agencies were left powerless. In New York City, the Council Against Poverty, beginning August 8, 1966, asked specific questions of the board of education about. 1966-67 proposals: they renewed their request for information on sub- sequent dates in August, September, and October. The information was still lacking on October 20 when everybody agreed that this should not liappemi. but, in point of fact, the 1)rogr~u1is hiid already been put iiito effect. as of the September opeinng of schools, so it. was all rather meaningless. I should like to make a final point with regard to the reduced effec- tiveness of the New York City conimunit action agency with the re- moval of the veto: The Council Against. Poverty's Education Committee reviewed time latest title I tentative projects just this past week. A letter dated March 14 was addressed to the president of the board of education iii whch the. council went. on record criticizing the. lack of meaning in its consultative role for programs had actually started prior to tlm~ re- quested endosemnent. of the Council Against Poverty. For example, they were consulted in regard to a. pilot, education program for pleg- nant. school-ace girls. Endorsement was sought at the end of Feb- ruary for this program which had been started in ~Januarv. PAGENO="0736" 155S ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. STFJGER. If I may, Mr. Chairman, would you clarify for the record when ~`ou are talking about March 9 and 10, is this 1967? Mrs. LEvIx. Yes, sir: I am talking about 1967, the current year. I should like to quote a paragraph from the March 14 letter of the New York City Council Against Poverty to Mr. Garrison, president of the board of education. Although the education committee and the Council devoted considerable time to these project reviews and have examined individual projects in the past, they are of the opinion that the piecemeal approach to the use of Title I funds which now total $7~ million to $80 million is not realistic or tenable. It is impossible for the Council to view the true impact or lack of impact of the Title I program when its only contact is through a many times hasty project by project review. What in the Council's view is needed for sound planning is a broader look at stated goals, objectives, and priorities. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much for a good statement. May we hear from the next witness? Mrs. BEx,i,~Mix. Mrs. Leviii lms some more important points she would like to acid. Mrs. LEvIN. No. 3: We ask that you make possible the combination of titles, 1)flrticularly titles I and III. The number of proposals subimmitteci make it innovative and necessary to discard many which are worthy of exploration~ but for which funds are insufficient under title III. The funds are more ample in title I. If it were possible t.o develop a partnership of community personnel with educators in the sharing of i(leas amid the sharing of funds, we think that this would open up many new' avenues for imimiovat ive experimentation. No. 4. we ask for amendments to render the required evaluations of title I projects meaningful. The act states that evaluations must be ma(ie. but not that the be utilized in future planning. Evaluations that cost half a million dollars w'ere submitted last September after programs had already been recycled. It. seems essential that the goals of programs should be clearly de- fined at the outset and that evaluations should include a summary of fin clings with recommendations that. have some meaning for followup. This isav cry expensive exercise and it should provide service to local school boards which have the responsibility for making policy based on the experience of the prograni. No. ~: We ask that you niaiidate. 1~ percent of funds for innovative 1~rojects to be set aside for the retraining of teachers. `We have several leading teacher e(lueators on the membership of the Citizens Com- mittee for Children and there was a c.onsensus among them that the teacher training institutions are not graduating teachers w'ho are equipped to do the kind of job that is necessary in urban schools. This year the Nation is spending $100 million of title I funds for in- service courses. which seem t.o be perpetuating the system's e.rrors in a closed loop. We should like to recommend an internship outside of the system (perhaps on the order of VISTA's (training program) so that an insight and understanding of the problems of this special group can be developed in the teachers who will then be better prepared to ~o into the classroom. Finally, No. (3: We should like to underscore. and endorse what 1Dm'. Bowman has said. We, too, ask that you reinforc.e other new PAGENO="0737" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1559 legislation calling for the creation of nonprofessional career develop- ment by amending the act. to cover training and salaries for indigen- ous personnel and to provide education for the classroom teacher to understand and to accept such help as an adjunct to his own pro- fessionalism. It has been projected that, by 19~i, one out of every four college graduates will be required to staff our classrooms in accordance with the method that we are currently pursuing. We obviously must find a solution to meet this problem, and it w-ould appear that we have a very promising source among the indigenous personnel. It is our strong feeling if the present drift continues without legis- lative clarification it will be difficult to deterinnie the. effectiveness of the appropriation of billions of (lollars. Mr. STEIGER. ~\Iay I say- and I am sure. Mr. Scheuer will say the same thing-you, I)r. Bowman and Mrs. Levin, have been most articu- late in terms of recommendations and you have clearly pinpointed the needs that exist. I am so much impressed that I will really pass my questions be- cause your time is limited as is ours except to say I would hope we will be successful either in this legislation, H.R. (~3O or in subse- quent legislation in providing a means for develo~)ing a program for paraprofessionals in this country. As I told Dr. Niemeyer when he was here, I would really like to come and visit the Bank Street School. Mrs. BOWMAN. We hope you will. Mr. STEIGER. We would like to visit you; I think it would be most revealing. I will pass my questions except to endorse what you have said and your concepts and to say that I am sure the committee will labor hard to try to develop the suggestions that you have made, Dr. Bowman, as well as attempting to provide some of the implementation for what the citizens committee for children of New York have made. It is always gratifying when the. witnesses will come forward with some specific recommendations on how they think we can improve the prograni and make. it. operate better so that we don~t continue, to simply do what we have, always done. to continue that kind of pattern which would be a very real mistake, in time and money and certainly in the lost children. Mr. SdHEm~R. I very much enjoyed the testimony of you two ladies and I think my colleagues here have shared their feeling of knowledge and enrichment of the comprehension of the ways these ongoing pro- grams are functioning in the field. Dr. Bowman, may I ask you to give us some specifics as to the field experience of subprofessionals? Fnder what conditions do they func- tion effectively and under what conditions have they functioned not so effectively, where, and in general can you dot a few i's and cross a few t's in these dozen or more cities. Dr. BOWMAN. Thank you both. First, one of the things that we have found to be a very important component in any program for utilizing nonprofessionals is to avoid rigid role definitions and role differentiations. We find that particularly in a new and evolving kind of program like this it is most important to enable people to experiment and 75-492'----61---pt. 2-47 PAGENO="0738" 1560 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS develop functions for auxiliaries in terms of specific needs of pupils in each situation rather than following rules that. are supposed to be applicable to every situation. To illustrate, in Illinois there is restrictive State legislation which prohibits the utilization of nonprofessionals in a monitorial capacity. l~\Then we observed a program in East St. Louis, Ill., we saw two rather disturbing examples of the application of this rule. First we found in one classroom a third-grade student helping to check yes and no answers on an objective test prepared by the classmates. This bright student used the teacher's book; it went very well. The student was being helpful. But the aid, a high school graduate, had to stand by and was not permitted to perform a function which was adequately performed by a third-grade student. In another instance, we found complaints by busdrivers that because aids were not allowed to serve in a monitorial capacity on the buses, their attention was diverted from the road, the lives of the children were endangered while the busdriver unaided by any nonprofessional tried to quiet the children. Now to go to the positive in this. In Washington, D.C., we ob- served a program which was sponsored by Howard University in co- operation with the model schools division of the District of Columbia Public Schools where there was flexibility about the functions and where teachers were allowed to select those functions which best suited the needs of the pupils and the particular skills which the aid could give. I saw an example of one Negro male auxiliary who was not good at the monitorial function and was not used in that because he had established such a buddy-buddy relationship with the boys in his class that his control was weakened. However, he was excellent, in going to the homes in cases of truancy and talking to the boys arid to their parents and saying to them, "You must. come to school and study harder. Believe me, I know.' I had that. experience. And here was a Ne~ro vouiuz man ta1kin~ to Negro boys in such a way that they would listen to him. So here was a case where the teacher who was a. very observant pei~oii could diagnose the situation and use the aid and there was enou~h flexibility as to make this role possible. Another word in re~rar(l to trailllflg. The pi'oblein in New York City i~ that the situatIon is SO vast, providing adequate training is so difficult. that. at the present time. they are doing a demonstration pilot. project in djstrict ~) in Lower Manhattan and Mrs. Verona WTilliams, the lovely aide who caine to von and who is a member of our advisory commission. works there and does help to bridge the gap between school and community by being involved in the school. As a parent aide ~iie understands the school and can interpret it to the community but she also understands the l)rol)leins of the area and can help to interpret the children to tiie middle class professionals so she serves as linkage between school and cominmiitv but she does this after very intensive in-depth training in terms of the school's goals. She waR not just plunged into this situation with no help. Mr. SCHEFER. How long was her training period ? Mrs. Bow~rAx. She trained for a summer institute and now she is engaged in a followup inservice training for a term, so she has had PAGENO="0739" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1561 an opportuity not only to be trained herself but an opportunity to talk with the teachers to whom she is assigned and to review their common experiences and plan together on the basis of the experience. Now in another district of New York City where there is no train- ing at. the present time for aids, it is reported that there are evidences of auxiliary personnel acting daily in a way that becomes dynamite to the school because they just have not been given an understanding of the school goals. They gossip to the community about the schools. They over protect their own chuldreii in the school. Tie don't stick to time schedules according to the reports we have received, and I don't want to say this is true of all of the aides in the school nor is Mrs. Williams who is really an unusual person really representative of all the aides in district 3. However, we do have far more problems reported in New York City in those places where there are no training facilities. I referred to the fact that it was so difficult to I)rovidle adequate training to all of the schools in an immense city like New York, but I would like to refer to a very imaginative device that Detroit has developed for a mobile training team of five persons to go from school to school and work with students and teachers iii one school after another. Mr. SCHEFER. Do you mean teacher aides? Mrs. BOWMAN. Yes; by students I meant in a sense the student aides, the aides who were learning to help in the school situation. The team of five consists of, first, a sociologist who helps the teach- er understand the life conditions of the situation in which he is teach- ing. There is a teacher-educator who helps the people with whom ho works to define educational goals and philosophy and to discuss methods for implementing these goals. There is a technical expert, one who is familiar with programed instruction and the so-called hardware in the schools and can help the aides to utilize these programs and pros-ide the individualized help to the pupils while they use a machine and work at their ow-n level of speed. There is also a psychologist who conducts group counseling sessions w-ith teachers and aides together to get out. into the open any of the difficulties that they face, any of the insecurities. Some teachers feel that aides are a threat to them. Sometimes aides are too intent upon their new role arid tend to object to doing any task that they consider too menial. These are things that need to he talked out together. Certainly the aide should not be given functions that should be assigned to the cus- todian or to the pupils, but only through ~ 01)1)O1'tiIliitV to eXl)1ess their so-called gripes and talk it through can this be resolved. The fifth member of the team is a.n experienced and successful aide who talks as one who has done this and who has faced the problems and has some concrete suggestions about how they can be. resolved. Mr. SCHEUER. May I ask you one last question? What. has been t.he reaction of the teachers unions and the teachers themselves w-here aides have been used? flow have the reacted to the change in their role? Mrs. BOWMAN. Let me tell you on our advisory committee is Charles Cugan, the president of the United Federation of Teachers. lie has PAGENO="0740" 1562 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS come to meetings of our advisory commission, has ordered copies of this interim report, and distributed it to his membership. 1-Te has expressed approval of our basic goals. Albert Shanker in New York has come to our conferences and we have been in touch with him. Mr. SCHEUER. What is his position? Mrs. BOWMAN. His position was favorable also. He is pre.sident of the New York Federation of Teachers. Mr. SCHEULE. I would like at this point to ask unanimous consent that the record be kept open in the event, either of these t.wo gentlemen would like to submit. a statement.. Chairman PERI~Ixs. Without. objection the record will be kept open for that purpose and if there. is no objection from the members the record in general will be kept. open until the middle of next week for anyone who wants to place in the record any additional information either by the majority or t.he minority. You will both have, that opportunity on these amendments or any other relevant subject matter in the elementary and secondary educa- tion amendments. Mr. Sc'nEFER. I would like to ask one final question of Mrs. Levin. Can you give, us from your experience a brief statement as to how you WOUl(l like to see. this committee and this Congress implement and encourage the kind of change that you see as desirable in the use of title I funds and change in the way of educational system functioll? I know that is a. broad subject. Mrs. Lrvix. It is ather broad subject and 1 thought. I covered it in the six point.s I made. I would like to reiterate, however, that greater sums of money are going to be needed to do the job. It would be t.ragic if these. funds were wasted because new methods were not exl)lored and developed to effect change. From our own observation up to this point, the moneys in New York Cit.y have been used substantially for a maintenance budget. and not to effect change. Mrs. BOWMAN. I would like to add one more point in terms of the quest ion you asked me before. I mentioned role development and training as to institutionalization we did find in northern Arizona where Navajo Indians were training to be aids and in Florida where migrant workers were trained to be aids, even though there was a firm and we believe an honest. commitment. in a.dva.nce to employ the aids, in the end circumstances which were said to be beyond the control of the superintendent of schools prevented this. a few of these aides were trained for jobs that did not exist.. However, to give the other example where there was adequate pre- planning and funds were layed aside and kept for this purpose and where there was an adequate c.ooperat.ion between the institution of hiirlie.r learning amid the school system-I speak now of one case, Puerto Rico-not only were. all of the aides trained during a summer program placed in the school systems in the fall but. all a.re. now enrolled on a work-study basis a.t the Fniversit.y of Puerto R.ico in a specia.l program that. the university provi(le.d to try to assist aides to grow on the job. Mrs. BENJAMIN. I would like to respond to your question about how the Citizens Committee for Children feels that we might see changes come about that would actually be innovative. PAGENO="0741" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1563 Mr. STEIGER. Would you identify yourself for us? Mrs. BENJAMIN. I am Mrs. Margaret. Benjamin and I serve as education staff for the Citizens Committee for Children. Mr. STEIGER. Thank you, Mrs. Benjamin. Mrs. BENJAMIN. I would like to suggest we seek legislative redress for the failure to have comprehensive planning in New York City. This has been partly the result of the failure of relationships between the Poverty Council and the board of education. Mr. SCHEUER. Is the Poverty Council the official organization? Mrs. BENJAMIN. Yes, it is the community action agency. I believe that only if you gentlemen could mandate a c.ornl)rehenSiVe plan could we expect any significant change. The board of education should be obliged to 1)rOvide a statement with each p~~~g1~111 saying how it firs into a total design for the im- provement. of the education of disadvaiit.aged children. I believe this is a feasible requirement and without it. we are all going to continue to flounder. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Dellenback, do you have quest.ions? Mr. DELLENBACK. I also have appreciated the testimony so far. May I ask a few questions of either Mrs. Benjamin or Mrs. Levin on the Citizens Committee itself? I am intrigued by the existence of such a committee, and I would like to know just a bit about it. I see that you have been about 100 committee members on your stationery. You have 36 members on the board of directors. The Citizens' Committee for Children of New York is an organiza- tion of professional and lay experts in various fields of child care. By combining their skills and working wherever possible in partner- ship with public officials, other organizations and interested indi- viduals, the. committee seeks to initiate and strengthen services for children who can neither organize nor speak for themselves. `Who belongs to this organization? How does one become a member? Mr. LEvIx. The committee has been in existence for over 20 years. Mr. DELLENBACK. This does not confine its structure strictly to education? Mrs. LEVIN. No, sir. I am chairman of the educational services section and Mrs. Benjamin is the research associate. of the educational services section. There are other sect.ions such as mental health, children's rights, health audi welfare. The committee is made up of professional and lay experts in those various areas of concern for children. Mr. DELLENBACK. I assume you are a nonprofit corporation ~ Mrs. LEvIN. We are a nonprofit corporation. Mr. DELLENBACK. Who elects the members ? Are you self-per- petuatin~? Mi's. I~ExJAMIN. New members are nominated by a nominating committee and elected by the full membership. Mr. DELLENBACK. The board then chooses its own members but it does not assert any public role over anyone who wants to become a member? Mrs. BrxjAMTx. Members of the. board also are elected by the meml.)ershi p. PAGENO="0742" 1564 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMEND~N'rS Mr. DELLENBACK. Do committee members serve for indefinite periods? Mrs. LEVIN. They serve for prescribed periods. They are elected for 3 years. Mr. DELLENBACK. Are you talking about committee members or members of the board? Mrs. LEVIN. Members of the board of directors as well as commit- tee members. Mrs. BENJAMIN. Unless they assume policymaking public office, then they are asked to step down. Mr. DELLENBACK. Would you not consider judges public office? Mrs. BENJAMIN. If you forgive me I would like to check on that. Mr. DELLENBACK. I do not mean to be overly detailed. I am just interested in the idea of a nonofficial group doing what, I think, can be a very healthy job of sitting and looking over the shoulder of an official or a series of official groups. I don't mean to be cross-exainm- ing you to find holes. I am looking for the genesis of this idea and its implementation. Mrs. LEVIN. I have rather taken its form for granted and I am glad you asked tills bccause I shall check this for myself. Mr. SCHEUER. Can any citizen join tile committee? Mrs. LEvIN. No, it is by invitation. Mr. DELLENBACK. The board is chosen by the committee and is elected periodically? Mrs. LEVIN. Board members serve for 3 years, one-third is elected every year. Mr. DELLENBACK. I would appreciate that for background. How often does the board meet? Mrs. LEVIN. Once a month. Mr. DELLENBACK. lou have 36 members. What is your average attendance? Mrs. LEvIN. It is very good. Mrs. BENJAMIN. Twenty as a minimum. Mr. DELLENBACK. How many members of the board actually involve themselves deeply in the study of the issues? You are on the educa- tional subgrouping of tile board. How many people on the board are in this subgrouping Mrs. LEV1N. I would say from my own observation of the people on the board that they all involve themselves deeply in their special area of inte~e~t. Mr. I)F:rJ~ExBAcI~. What does that mean? Mrs. LEvIN. Well, 1 am interested in education and I spend many hours every week visiting schools aiid reading educational material, filling the holes iii my background, consulting with Mrs. Benjamin. Mr. DELLENBACK. Checking to see what the basic group is and how it is composed, how many of the members of the board are on your committee on education? Mrs. BENJAMIN. A little more than five, just glancing at the listmg. Mr. DELLEXBACK. 1)o these people spend as much time as you do, Mrs. Levin? On this? Mrs. LEVIN. No. Mr. L)ELLENBACK. Do you spend a considerable amount of time on thi~ PAGENO="0743" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1565 Mrs. LEvIN. Yes. Mr. DELLENBACK. Do you have meetings of your group between meetings of the board of directors? Mrs. LEvIN. Yes, we do. Mr. STEIGER. May I ask the gentleman to yield for a. moment? Mr. DELLENBACK. Yes, I would be glad to yield. Mr. STEIGER. In your testimony, Mrs. Levin, you did not touch on what a number of the witness before the committee have asked and have made reference to; namely, whether or not Project Headstart ought to be transferred out of the Office of Economic Opportunity and placed under the U.S. Office of Educat ion. Has the educational subcommittee for the Citizens Committee given any thought to that or made any recommendations? Mrs. BENJAMIN. We have not reviewed it and we do not have a policy on it.. We do view with some concern the absorption of pre- kindergartn programs by the Board of Education in New York espe- cially since the board of education has not been able to provide kindergarten for every child. In essence we are providing education for 4-vear-olds at the expense of the 5-ear~olds. Mrs. LEvIx. .Xnd not 1)roviding education for the 5-yea.r-olds. Mrs. BENJAMIN. Moreover, we are concerned with the lack of con- gruity in New York between prekindergarten programs and the Head- start program, the obvious competition for children and the failure to dovetail services, but we have not prepared a position for you today on our opinion as to whether this program would more properly belong in OEO or the Office of Education. Mr. DELLENBACK. The sort of presentation you have made here- is this the work of your subcommittee? Is this the official action of the board? Or is this the recommendation of the committee? Mrs. BENJAMIN. The educational services section has been working on title I intensively for more than a year and this actual testimony is the result of a distillation of the ideas that have come before the educational services section ouer that period of time. Mr. DELLENBACK. Do you have staff or is it all volunteer? Mrs. BENJAMIN. I am the. staff member for it. Mr. DELLENIIACK. Xre you on a full-time staff? Mrs. BENJAMIN. Time and a half. Mr. DELLENBACK. You have. on a half-time basis and you work time and a half. This is typical of the situation. You then have one staff person and a committee of five or six or seven who are the ones most deeply involved in this? Mrs. Lvvix. Actually the membersli ip of the e(lu(at.ional services section is larger than just five members. I believe Mrs. Benjamin was referring to board members who serve on that section. Mr. DELLENBACK. So there are members of the committee who are not, on the board? Mrs. LEVIN. That is right. Mr. DELLENBACK. Have you found that. the school authorities are cooperative with you as you seek to ge.t. information? Mrs. BENJAMIN. We have found that. the lay board members of the board of education have been cooperative and, at their prodding, the staff of the board of education has been less resistant than one might have expected. PAGENO="0744" 1366 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDL~CATION AMENDMENTS Mr. DELLENBACK. I would assume that before you came before us on this that you sought to discuss these matters with either the lay board or the school authorities, am I correct? Mrs. BENJAMIN. Decidedly. Mr. DELLENBACK. What reaction have you gotten from the school authorities on this? Mrs. BENJAMIN. You may recall that we have said in our testimony that we concluded that the only recourse was legislative. Mr. I)ELLENBACK. I wish you would put it right here in the midd~le of this discussion that you found on these suggestions it was necessary to have some outside leverage to get the board to follow down to im- plement these suggestions. Mrs. BENJAMIN. Decidedly. Mr. 1)ELLENBACK. Were there other suggestions that you put to them that they did not go along with you on Mrs. BENJAMIN. There are other matters that I have dealt infor- mallv with members of the board about which I would like to sum- marize for you in later communications if you like. Mr. DELLExB~~cIc. Have they bee.n receptive to these ideas? Mrs. BEx~r~rIN. Yes, but the. way is not as clearly defined for their operations as they or we would like. They are dealing with a strong bureaucracy, as you have heard it described, whose concern is the day- to-day operation of ESEX and not. overall policy matters. It. is very difficult when you have, such a close view of the situation within the hoard of education staff to step hack and see what it. is all about in the long run. Mr. IDELLENBACK. I see here a potential advantage for a group like the CCC. You do have a degree of objectivity or should have to bear on this. Sometimes we get so close to things we don't. see the forest for the trees. Flow many members are there on the New York Board of Edu- cation ? Mrs. BENJAMIN. Nine lay members. One serves as chairman of State. and Federal aid committee on which another member also serves. Mr. DELLENBACK. You have, found as you discussed elementary and secondary education problems with citizen members of tile board, lay members of the board that. they have been receptive by and large to your approaches and to the suggestions you have made? Mrs. BENJAMIN. Yes: but I believe we might sa that the are hamstrung b a lack of effective functioning between the staff level and the lay board level of the board of education. Mr. DELLENB.~CK. Mr. Chairman. I am not just rambling on this but partly what I am thinking of is what seems to he a major im- portance. If we are concerned with the importance of being charged with education in education, do we deal directly with State depart- ments of education, the professionals in the field. This series of comments is interesting to me if it is typical it says something that tile thrust of legislation that comes out on tile Federal level. We may find ourselves in tile situation where education is so much in the hands of the educators that they become an immovable bureauc- racy that officialdom is at a loss to really to bend no matter what we PAGENO="0745" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1567 do in the way of legislation and it is imperative that what we develop is tailored to meet these points. This seems to me to be pertinent to potential legislation. iMir. FORI. I hope you are keeping in mind in your (uSd551011 that this school board is appointed by the mayor of the city of New lork and is not. answerable to the people. of ~\ew IorR directly. I think you will find across the coiiiitrv there are signilicaimt (llfFerences as to the independence or the respolisi veness of l)oards. Appointed boards tend to differ from the school boards whicli have to be reelected with public approval of their actions. Mr. DELLENBACK. This is an interesting observation. It. was not a factor of which I was aware. Is the superintendent, of schools of New York City elected or appointed? Mrs. BENJAMIN. He is an appointee of the. board of education. Mr. DELLENBACK. I gather from your series of co!nments the mayor elected by the citizens appoints the individual members of the board. The board then chooses their superintendent and the superintendent is responsible for the day-to-day operat.ions of the school. Mr. SCTIEUEIi. I might say. un(ler the law of the State of New York, the board of education and the superintendent are responsible not. to the mayor who appoints the members of the board but to the State conlmissione*r of education-so the mayor is in the somewhat anoma- ions position of appointing the members of the board who appoint the superintendent but in actual 1)oilIt of fact lie, has very little direct control over educational policies and programs. Iltimately, the responsibility over New York City education ~s vested in the State commissioner of education. 1)r. Bowman, vou probably know more about this than I do. Mrs. Bow~rAN. That is quite true hut I wanted to add one other point. which I think is significant here. Because of protests about. the quality of the board of education appointed by the mayor the system was evolved a few years ago whereby the mayor asked for recommendations for board membership from a i)anei of citizens and agreed to take someone from that panel. ITowe.vcr. asked for a. number of recommendations so that he would have choice within the group recommended. This was an attempt. even within the. procedures which have been outlined, to get a little closer to the people. Mr. Foim. I might make this facetious observation that. some of the former propoments of District honie rule-and I classify myself on this-might want to take on an amendment to the next home rule bill so t.hat you can have an elected school board in New York, too. Mr. DEr~LENw~CK. }-Iow many years does a member of the school board serve? Mrs. BENJAMIN. Seven years. Mr. DELLENBACK. Removable only for cause and not at. the will of the mayor? Mrs. BENJAMIN. This is right. Mr. DEI~LrNnidTc. Does the State department of education have the authority to remove any such member, since the board is responsible to the State department? Mrs. BoWMAN. I should know specifically but it is my iml)ression that. the department of education may upon charues remove the board and in fact. at the time that I referred to when a panel was appointed PAGENO="0746" 1568 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS to make recomnienclations the State department of education had in fact stepped in. Mr. I)ELLENBACK. I wish I could lean back and smugly say we have no problems like this in the State or Oregon but unfortunately I can- not. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Ford. Mr. FonD. We had some testimony that touched briefly on the pro- gram that you mentioned, Dr. Bowman, in connection with the value of the Teacher Corps. spokesmen for the I)etroit. educational sys- tem pointing out that the Teacher Corps 1)rovided a method for getting an especially trained teacher into those schools dealing with the recognizably culturally deprived children. Do you see the kind of program you have been describing here with the suhprofessional as a program that would benefit from having in- creased numbers of teachers trained through the device of the Teacher Corps in the special problems of the culturally deprived children? Mrs. BO\VMAN. Yes, in(leedl. In fact I believe all teachers in educa- tion. teachers in colleges and in inservice courses need to have more understanding of the problems of disadvantaged children. One of the studies conducted by the Bank Street College of Education has beeii in this very field-teacher education in a social context which goes beyond the utilization of nonprofessionals but does in fact reach out. to the entire school staff. It is our feeling that a basic approach to education views every per- son in the school building as having an impact upon the children. If a janitor does his work well, he is a model to the children as opposed to one who sloppily goes through a perfunctory piece of work. The top superinten(lent needs to understand so that he can coordi- nate and orchestrate others to serve the needs of disadvantaged chil- dren. not in any sense to lump together all disadvantaged children because tli~re is as great a continuum among them as there is in any other group of children. They are not problem children but children with special problems. The more that teachers. Teacher Corps. administrators and supervisors and auxiliary personnel can ~mderstand the life conditions under which some of their pupils are forced to live and the more that it is possible to bring not only the teachers into the community but bring the community into the classroom the more we will be able to eliminate the danger that corrodes our system of school community alienation and the more we can work toward a unified approach in terms of rec- ognized educational goals. Mr. Foiin. Mrs. Levin, you mentioned in your comments a parallel between what you were seeking here in the several programs and the success of a relatively new program called VISTA. I took from your suggestion that VISTA appealed to you because there is a sense of mission andl dedication and, if you will, esprit die corp:4 that attaches to a VTST~ volunteer when he goes into this flat ional p~°g'~''~ Many of us who support. and have supported the Teacher Corps since its inception had in mind that the Teacher Corps would produce, or would attract and develop people with the same kunds of ded~ca- PAGENO="0747" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLCATION AMENDMENTS 1569 tion and pi'ecoimiiitriieiit that the Peace Corps and VISTA have developed and have recruited. What I am asking both you and Dr. Bowman is to call upon your accumulated experience in this area. I would like you to coiisider this proposition. There are some Members of the Congress who have been suggesting although there is no legislation of this kind yet introduced that rather than pursuing further the avenues opeii by the leaclier Corps as it is now constructed, we might better turn tile money over to the large city school districts earniarking it for teacher training. With the large cities, you set up a program of teacher training be- cause you know what is best needed in your area. Calling upon your experience in the field to which you have directed your attention here today, do you think that this approach would be likely to produce tile kind of teacher that you are going to need in these areas? Mrs. LEVIN. On the basis of our own observations over an extended period of visiting, we have seeli inservice training, hlaII(Eie(l by tiit~ establishment, which has been unsuccessful iii reaching tlìe children of the ghetto. I believe that I have sai(l that we see a perpetuat~~ii of the same kind of failure in developuig qualified teachers unless there is some. outside facility suggested for triliflilig ~vhiicii will de- velop in the future teachers an insight and understanding of the ghetto child and how to reach him. if it is more of tI e saiiie, ~t is nut going to achieve that end. Mrs. BOWMAN. I will heartily endorse what Mrs. Levin just said. I would like to add to it a response to what 1 think I heard as another aspect of your question and that is, in the choice between funds for voluntary programs and for funds for enlploVe(l professionals in the school, should we give to the local community- Mr. FoRD. No; that is not the question. You are talking about the subprofessionals who will work with what we identify, from whatever Source their education caine, as conipetent. teachers in the special problems of disadvantaged children, recognizing that to use the sub- professional there must be a competent teacher for them to work with. We are talking about whether we would l)e niore. likel to have a suppi of those competent teachers by the presently conceived Teacher Corps or giving time school districts an equivalent amount of money for tile Teacher Corps and telling theni to devise their own prograni themselves. Mrs. BOWMAN. I think the Teacher Corps has contributed and can contribute even more toward developing the kind of teacher who can deal with the problem. I think the Teacher Corps is only one aspect. This is not the panacea. This is a many faceted problem and needs mai approaches. I would like to see competing systems of programs at time State, Federal, and local level-competing in the sense of each trying to outdo one another in a very effective program but cooperat- ing in terms of the ultimate goals. I think it would be too bad to eliminate some of the very innovative thinking and activitie.s at. the Fedleral level which serve to catalyze the local people to further efforts. However, I 1110 think that without the coordination at t.he local level and without effective use of the resources, the training through the Teacher Corps, all of our efforts are futile unless there is coordination. Mr. DELLEN BACK. `Wouldl the gentleman yield? PAGENO="0748" 1570 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. FORD. I do, yes. Mr. DELLENBAC~. Recognizing as we all do some of the great ad- vantages that have come from the Teacher Corps and you have touched on this Dr. Bowman and recognizing, the immensity of the problem as all of us have recognized and touched on, let me put the question this way. Reaching then toward the goal of improving the capacity of the teachers on the firing line to really do the job effectively, could you not visualize, utilizing the same number of dollars that have gone into the Teacher Corps being placed for use in the New York educa- tional system in a way that would improve the results for winch you would reach, do you feel the Teacher Corps-if I may phrase it an- other way, represents the ideal utilization of dollars to be used for training teachers of the disadvantaged? Mrs. BOWMAN. No; I don't think it is the only or even the ideal way. I think it is one important way but I think there should be many others. Under the National Defense Education Act there have been insti- tutes for teachers of disadvantaged children and youth which have been very effective. We at Bank Street. College of Education have had teams from different. school systems come for the last two summers to work with us on how the administrators, the supervisors, the teach- ers, the whole school system can deal with this question of the. disad- vantaged child, so I think we caimot pin all of our faith on one program, splendid as I think the Teacher Corps is, so that rather than thinking of the funds as very limited and asking they should be used for Teacher Corps or something else, I would rather see the funds for rfeael1ei~ Corps remaining intact and more. funds made available, for many and varied programs because this is such a many-faceted problem. Mi'. DELLENB\CK. That. is neither the question I put. nor Mr. Ford's. Mrs. BOW~L~X. No; but it gave me an opportunity to say something about which I f~~t very strongly. Mr. DELLENIiACK. Since the subject is open, do you have any com- ment to make. Mrs. Benjamin? Mrs. BENJAMIN. I will limit, myself to large city school systems. If present. metliod'~ were appropriate then I don't believe that the Congress would have had to pass the Elementary and Secondary Edu- cation Act, and I think that you are working at your own cross pur- poses if you hope that the schools themselves will be able to generate the innovative teaching ability to re.demiat.e their own system. You granted funds for them to break out. of that mold. Mr. DELLENBACK. So the Teacher Corps then does represent the best role t.hat you can visualize for the utilization of limited dollars for the training of teachers? Mrs. BENJAMIN. I believe that is your opinion. Mr. DELLENBACK. I don't mean to express it as m opinion. I was trying to paraphrase what I thought. you were saving. Mrs. Lrvix. I think we would like to leave, the door open for other experimental progranis. There are 01 Iiei' alternatives, such as alt internship made available to future. teachers so they could have an exposure working in the field to develop familiarity with the corn- munitv and the children in the community and the problems they have to work with. It seems to me that would lead in the direction PAGENO="0749" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1571 toward developing teachers who would then be able to go into the classroom and teach the children. Mr. DELLENBACK. Then neither of you is saying that the Teacher Corps is the ideal solution. Mrs. BOWMAN. It is one solution. Mr. DELLENBACK. You are not saying it is the ideal solution. Mrs. BOWMAN. It is one excellent solution and an excellent con- tribution but to bring new teachers into the situation does not change existing tea.chers. One of the difficulties of bringing innovations into the school is that those who evaluate the new teachers are those who have been trained in traditional teaching behavior-the school administrators, the teacher educators, and we have to get to the root and with staff development programs in terms of an innovative approach to edu- cation and a deeper understanding of the social context in which edu- cation operates today. Mr. FORD. Could I try to pursue you back in the direction toward my question? Apparently there is more defensiveness on that side of the table than I recognize. Mr. DELLENBACK. I am not speaking for myself but I am speaking for those who are absent from both sides of the desk who have ex- pressed some concern. Mr. Fo1~D. To put it bluntly, we have before this committee some questions relating to the very life of the Teacher Corps. The alter- native being proposed by people who certainly are not suggesting that we not have this kind of trained teacher is a program of giving money instead to the school districts across the country and saying here is money for teacher training and you develop at the local level a teacher training program. We will devise a program to recruit a t.ype of person and then direct these people into a program in conjunction with a local school district and some teacher education facility. All of the school super- rntendents who have preceded you here have been asked would you rather we send teacher corpsmen to you or would you like to have the money and you would do it as you will. You can just guess what most of them would do. I am not trying to suggest a Teacher Corps as an alternative to any of the people you have been talking about.. I am asking you as people who are con- cerned specifically and have a considerable amount of expertise and experience in the several approaches that are being made and have been made over a period of time to the special problems of disadvantaged children to evaluate these two ways of getting at the kind of person that we are trying to train with the Teacher Corps, not this kind of person as a substitute for anything else but how would we best train a teacher and be sure we are going to get a high-quality teacher with a commitment to teach disadvantaged children. Wouldn't we be likely to get it. through the National Teacher Corps type of approach or would we be more likely to get it. if we gave your superintendent of New York x million dollars and said you devise the program. Tha.t is the basic quest.ion. Mrs. BENJAMIN. If I am not mistaken we have something like 200 Teacher Corps placements in New York. 1 have not seen any one PAGENO="0750" 1572 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDICATION AMENDMENTS of these people in operation. One of the reasons we are hesitating in answering your question is that we dont want to spea.k about some- t liiii~r with which we do not have firsthand experience. If you were to lose only two alternatives which seems to be the di- re(t ion in which von are insisting- Mr. FORD. We can only vote yes or no and we can't vote on two alter- natives, although it would be nice if there were not 434 other people over here and T iild sit down to write, the great bill. The best way to get a great education bill would be if I could write the bill myself and the rest of these people would not bother me. Jim ~cheuer might help me a little bit provided he did not make any suggestions beyond grammatical corrections. The real Probleul is we are down to the point with this legislation whore we have to take a look from the pragmatic point of view of wlu-thier we are going to have a Teacher Corps or not or whether we are goinu to approach the problems that the Teacher Corps ap- pioaches in some other direction. Mrs. BENJAMIN. The Congress has made a very limited commit- ment to the Teacher Corps idea. It is difficult for us to support this program in the absence of seeing its real activity. The Citizens Committee for Children has really grave questions about the continuation of inservice training in inadequate vehicles as we l)elieve theiui to be presently in the New York City schools. Mrs. BOWMAN. I will try to answer your question directly. I think the Teacher Coups should be continued. I say this as Garda Bowman, not representing Bank Street College of Education. We have no position on this, nor is this based upon intensive study as other comments that I have made on nonprofessionals in education were ba.se(l. However, if the decision now must be between either continuing the Teacher Corps as it is or using this money in direct subsidy to the States for teacher t raining programs. 1 would like, to suggest that you continue the Teacher Corps. However I feel that the Teacher Corps alone is iiiost inadequate and that we do need more continuing and more thorough training not only of teachers but school administrators and supervisors and professionals together within systems and within legions so that they can share experience through institutes calling in many communities through regional laboratories, through more re- search and demonstration and through more involvement of the community. So my answer tD your question is yes, keep the Teachers Corps but build on that in the future when this is possible because there are many more needs to be met in order to achieve full and tnily effective teacher education programs in this country. Mrs. Lrvix. I should like to emphasize one point that Dr. Bow- man made and that is the involvement of the community. I think it is very important for us to remember that there are people who can s1eik in the community for the community needs and to interpret them in a way that we don't always understand from the outside. Mr. FORD. I would just like to make one observation. You have touched on this many times, and I don't think we are confessing to anything, that you live in one of the cities that does the poorest job imn~der the Economic Opportunity Act. PAGENO="0751" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDtJCATION AMENDMENTS 1573 My first experience with the Detroit program is that it has been relatively trouble free. A thousand CAP programs across the country have had enough publicity to slow down the rest of the problems in New York, Boston, Los Angeles, and I can't pick the fourth one quickly, I hope in judging the cooperation between the educational system and the community action program that you will look out to the experience of some other large cities across the country, and I am not even prepared to guess why it is working in Detroit and not in Cleveland, New York, Los Angeles, and in other places. I leave that to the people who know that area better but I hope in considering the value of the respective programs that we are dealing with at the Federal level you look to the experience of other cities other than your own. *As an outsider-Mr. Scheuer cant say this and lie might take issue with me-your record in New York is not distinguished in that regard. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you Dr. Bowman, Mrs. Levin, and Mrs. Benjamin. I thank all of you ~or appearing here on a Saturday especially. You have presented some excellent testimony. I again want to thank Congressman Scheuer for having the foresight and vision for inviting you people from the great State of New York. Mrs. BOWMAN. We thank you for the opportunity. Chairman PERKINS. If there is no objection I would like to insert in the record at this point a statement of Mr. Joseph D. Lohman, chair- man, California Advisory Education Commission, 721 Capital Mall, Sacramento, Calif., along with a letter I addressed to Congressman Moss and an article in the Carnegie Quarterly. (The documents referred to follow:) MARCH 17, 1967. Hon. JOHN E. Moss, U.S. House of Repre8entatives, Wa8hington, D.C. DEAR JOHN: I appreciate very much your communication of March 14 which I received this morning. I am very grateful for your thoughtfulness in furnish- ing me with a copy of the statement of Joseph D. Lohman, Chairman of the California Advisory Compensatory Education Commission. The proposed fund- ing of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act as reflected in the adminis- trative budget is. as Dr. Lohman points out, substantially below the authorizations provided by Congress in extending the Act last year, PL-89-750. I strongly favor a full funding of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, particularly in Title I, and I intend to make my views known to the House Appropriation Committee at the appropriate time in connection with its consid- eration of the appropriations for the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. In the meantime. I shall be most pleased to make Dr. Lohman's statement part of our current hearings on the Elementary and Secondary Amendments of 1967. Warm regards. Sincerely, CARL P. PERKINS. Chairman. STATEMENT OF JOSEPH P. L0HMAN, CHAIRMAN, CALIFORNIA ADVISORY COMPENSA- TORY EDUCATION Co~rsiissiox. SACRAMENTO. CALIF. When Congress passed the 1966 amendments to ESEA Title I, it authorized $1.45 billion, which would have meant about $110 million to California. But the President only recommended, and Congress passed, an appropriation of $1.05 billion or 80 percent of the authorization. And while Congress' 1966 amend- ments to the authorization bill provided that additional CluI(lrpn recpjvp ESEA Titla I services, the appropriation bill did not include the $123 million authorized PAGENO="0752" 1574 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS to fund programs for these children. As programs for the new children had to be funded from the $1.05 billion requested by the President, the effect was to reduce the ongoing programs to 70 percent of the authorized amount. However, in California our appropriation for fiscal 1967 is only 67 percent of our authorization. We are faced with providing programs for more children than last year with less funds than we received last year. Last year's appro- priation amounted to $252 per eligible child. The fiscal 1967 authorization would have provided $259 per eligible child. But our actual appropriation was dras- tically reduced to $1SO per eligible child. This means that California either will not be able to include all of the children programmed in the authorization, con- sidering the additional children Congress added, or the quality of the entire pro- gram stands to be severely impaired by spreading the funds too thinly. To add to the seriousness of the problem, it is our understanding that the President's fiscal 1968 appropriation request for ESEA Title I is based on the fiscal 1967 figures. This means that the deleterious effects of the cutback will be projected into the future, despite the fact Congress' authorization bill in- creases the income eligibility formula to $3,000 instead of the current $2,000 figure. While the authorization for fiscal 1968 is $2.4 billion, the President has requested an appropriation of $1.2 billion-exactly hail of what is needed to reach the number of children the Congress intended. Because California's cost of living is higher than that of many other states, the use of a $3,000 allocation formula with no significant increase in appropriations means that California's share of the national appropriation will be substantially reduced compared to that of other states. In other words. California is likely to receive even less per eligible child than it did under the current year's already-reduced appropriation. More than 90 percent of California's school districts have an entitlement under ESEA Title I and are affected by Congressional action on this appropriation. In the program's first year, close to 300,000 California children in 1,044 school dis- tricts benefited. But even last year's appropriation was only enough to begin the job since it provided a meaningful compensatory education program for less than half of the California children in need of compensatory education. A 1964 survey by the Governor's Advisory Committee on Compensatory Education found that about 700,000 California children from poverty backgrounds were not suc- ceeding in school and needed special help. Even more funds will be needed if, indeed, we are to reach all of the children who need compensatory education. We cannot serve more children in 1967 than were served in 1966 with a reduction of funds without seriously diluting the program to the extent that it will not niake an appreciable impact on the children served nor contribute to raising their achievement level. [Carnegie Quarterly, Vol. XIV, No. 4, Fall 1966] THE RICH GET RICHER & THE POOR GET Poonmi . . . SCHOOLS "The present allocation of fiscal resources works against education in the central cities. The lesser resources applied to education in the cities apparently hold down educational performance, particularly in the low income neighbor- hoods. Additional resources, if massive enough. would probably improve educa- tional achievement. The political possibility of finding such resources for central city education is. at the best, uncertain." In those dispassionate sentences. Alan K. Campbell, professor of political science and director of the metropolitan studies program at Syracuse University, sums up some of the early findings of a series of Carnegie-supported studies of large city school systems. Economists and political scientists are looking at the policies which emerge from school l)Olitics and at the ways in which the decisions which produce these policies are made-by whom, how, why, and in what environ- ments. Professor Campbell gave some of the findings in a paper delivered last summer at Stanford Fuiversity's Cubberley Conference (copies are not available, so please do not request them; however, a list of books and journal articles which are forthcoming from the study will be found at the close of this article). He presented an array of facts. figures. and analyses which add lip to a totally dis- heartening picture of the present efforts and future prospects for financing educa- tion in American cities. It is not merely that those that need it most-the city PAGENO="0753" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1573 schools-are getting least. That was already known, though how badly their situation has deteriorated just recently relative to the suburbs was not known. It is the portents for the future that aie alarming. For if the interested groups in the cities, including the boards of education, perform in the future as they have up to now, it appears unlikely that there will be effective voices demanding the educational resources the cities so desperately require. One may ask: "TV/do speaks 101- the city schools?" As recently as 1J3T, annual educational expenditures Per pupil in 3~ of the largest metropolitan areas were roughly equal in the cities and their suburbs. By 1P62. the suburbs were spending, on the average, $145 iuioie Pci' pupil than the central cities. This ilittii'ential is primarily a rellectioii of the fact that (luring those years the disparity in ~veaItli berweeii cities and suburbs was growing. The shocker, however, is that state ~id to the schools, which oie i~iight think would be designed to redress this imbalance soniewhat, discriminates against the cities. On the average, the suburbs receive $40 more in state aid per pupil than the cities. Some of the federal aid to education (which canie too late to he included in the 1962 statistics) is. of course, aimed directly at disadvantaged areas. But while the federal programs are always referred to as "massive.'' and while one and a quarter billion doilars per year are a lot of dollars. wlieii they oi'e spread over fifty states, for rural as well as city areas, the iiul)act on any nile city-or any one school-is not massive at all. Whatever the sources of the money, local, state, or federal, the lint is that the nation is devoting many iin~re reo urces to cilia mitilig suhuri an children tliaii city cliilihien. Or to !ut it another way, it is spending lunch inure money to educate the cli lid men of the well-off than the clii hi rca of the p ii'. Ami(l every shre of (V~i ilmilde evelemice points ti the concluso in that tile educational needs (if Jour children are far greatei' thin those of aflliie;it cliihli'eu. By any measure oiie wants to Use-PUh)il pei'foimance on tests, dropout rate, Ji'oportiin of students gi ing on to higher eduatiomi-the output of the schools in tIme depressed areas of the cities is very much poorer than that of the suburbs. There is little reason to believe that even to equalize treatment would begin to close the gap. To achieve the substance rather than merely the theoretical form of equal ecluca- tional opportunity requires the apl)lication of unequal resources : more rather than less to the students from poor homes. That knowledge is, of course, what underlies tie idea of compensatory educa- tion hieing pushed by the federal goveruimient and to a much lesser extent by a very few of the states. Tile trouble thus far with compensatory education, how- ever, is not the idea but the few funds allocated to it. They ai'e spread so far and so thin that only barely perceptible improveliiemlts. by and large, coil be made. Anti barely perceptible improvements have barely perceptible ehects on pupil performance. It does little good to reduce class size from, say, 31.6 to 3(18 (like the average American faniilv, time average American classroom seems always to contain a number of whole children plus a fraction of a child), or to raise expenditures for pupil supplies from $7.25 to $8.50. or to add one social worker to the staff of a slum high school. The evidence already in on compensatory education tends to prove this. There is scattered evidence, however, from the few places where it has been tried, that dramatic efforts-placing enormous concentration on the teaching of reading, for example. in very small classes-have dramatic effeet~. Though this evidence is not conclusive because there is not enough of it. it does suggest that some of the seemingly intractable educational problems of the cities' schools would yield before the infusion of massive resources. The question is where to find them, or, more accurately, how to get them for the city schools. For the money is not hidden, after all. A ureat deal of it is spent in this country every day, for education and for housing, freeways, war, national parks, liquor, cosmetics, advertising, and a lot of other things. It is a question of the allocation of money, which means the estal)lishing of priorities. That is primarily a political process, and it is heavily influenced by the clarity, vigor, and power with which spokesmen for various interests press their claims. In education, the decision-making unit at the local level, and the principal spokesman for the schools, is the board of education. Various members of the Syracuse group are making case studies of the role of the school boards in 7~-492--67-pt. 2-4S PAGENO="0754" 1376 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTCATION AMENDMENTS several cities, with particular emphasis on Atlanta. Boston, Chicago, New York, and San Francisco. In the cities studied-and though there may be some strik- ing exceptions, the rule appears to hold for most cities-the boards of education have proved to be more tax-conscious than expenditure-conscious. They have tended to tailor demands to what they calculated the tax traffic would bear rather than to hammer home the needs of the schools and the expenditure levels that would be necessary to meet them. Since taxpayers' groups have many spokesmen and school children, especially poor ones, have few, one might have expected the boards of education to have attempted more in the way of cajoling, pleading, and demanding. This line of reasoning, however, ignores the composition of most school boards. At any rate, though boards of education might have accomplished much more if they had tried harder in the days when the cities were affluent. the question is now almost academic. Most of the big cities are strapped financially, and although some could raise more locally if they would, it is clear that the kind of money that is needed simply cannot be raised by the cities from local sources alone. Much of it will have to come from increased state and federal aid. Here the passive role of the school boards is much less easy to understand. If they despair of the possibility of getting adequate tax money at home, it is hard to fathom why they have not been leading the fight for external aid, but they have not. So far, the Campbell group concludes, the boards of education have played a relatively minor role, and "there is no evidence in the studies we have undertaken to indicate that this role is going to undergo any drastic change." Even if it did, it is obvious that strong and active school boards alone could not bring sufficient pressure to bear on behalf of increased aid to the cities. But a coalition of school board members plus local business leaders, various civic groups, school administrators, and teachers' organizations might be able to. "No such coalition now exists." Campbell says, though there are signs in some cities that business leaders are becoming increasingly concerned about the quality of education. As their concern grows, perhaps they w-ill serve as rallying points fr strong coalitions to speak for the cities' schools. (Tl~e following statement by Dean Daniel E. Griffiths was sub- initted for the record STATEMENT BY DANIEl. E. GRIFFITITS. DEAN. SCHoOl, OF EDT'CATION, NEW YORK UNIVERSITY, MARCH 21, 1967 EVATFAlION OF THE ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDL'CATION ACT (P.L. 89-101 GcIl ci'al 1. The Act has provided stimulus for educational change and development. 2. The no st frequently voiced criticism is that proposals are acted UPOII and allocations itiade too late for effective implementation of plans. Early commit- melt by local districts is essential. Decisions come so late that providing for eonhiilementa ry funds in local budgets and for staffing is extremely difficult. Bu(1iiets need to be drawn and approved before precise project allocations are nIa(i('. Further, late decisions imimike it necessary for local districts to gamble on projects being approved and funded, and those that need the help the most ai'e often least aide or willing to "gamble" or `invest" local funds. LTncertainty ab itt allicittiomis has had a debilitating effect. 3. 1)istricts imeed the help of design and evaluation specialists and other re- source pei'soits in the preparation of proposals. 4. Wealthy districts have an advantage over poor ones in securing grants for several i'easons: a They are able and willing to gamble local funds prior to the actual ~rt1 nt. b Their staffs are better able to prepare polished proposals-greater educational sophistication and savvy. (c They are willing and able to hire consultants to help prepare pro- I)Ostlls. ~imne estimate that it costs about $10,000 to prepare an outstanding proposal with a proper professional tone. PAGENO="0755" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1377 5. While it has been inandatoly to build evaluation into I~roPo~a~. the re~u1ts have been token and of little valve. Further, there has been no widespread dis- seinination of results so that District A can take advantage of District B's ex- periences. 0. There should be provisions for interstate and interdistrict transfer of funds to take full advantage of unexpended monies. Further, adjust meats from `line to line'' on individual budgets should be possible as experience yields wisdom. Poor judgments on early estimates have hampered many projects. 7. Guidelines should be more general rather than categorical, to meet local ijeeds. The problems of the suburbs are not the same as those of the inner city. it should be possible to tailor proposals to deal with the particular problems of states. regions, or local communities. S. The role of universities in 89-10 projects should be broadened and spelled out. Title I-Sj,ccial programs for the deprived 1. Many districts do not have resources for planning-skills lacking. 2. Aid is too categorical and guidelines too severe. This reduces flexibility and limits creativity. Proposals must satisfy not only gui(leliIIes but transitory notions of government persoIix~el. Only certain lines of thinking are encouraged. 3. There has been some difficulty in identifying children to parti('ipate. Defi- nitions of poverty and deprivation should be made more inclusive. 4. Adjustment of budget items should he possible as project is implemented. 5. Administrative expenses are not taken into account sufficiently. Every pro- posal requires some local investment, and those districts mimost in need of assist- atice are often least willing to make the necessary local commitment or take a i'isk. 0. There needs to he cognizance of the newest developments in providiiig for the deprived. For instance, some wealthy districts aie accepting students bussed in from slum areas. Title I allocations need to take this into account. Title II-Lib,ariC~ (10(1 materials 1. General response to Title II is excellent. 2. There is some questioll about legality of providing materials for lrivate sectarian schools. Some feel, however, that the fact that some public schools have acted as fiscal agents for securing materials for private schools has fostered (~lo5er relationships between the two. 3. There should be fewer categorical grants by subject area. 4. SometimeS local allocations for materials are cut back the year following Title II grant. Title III_~S'l1pplCmCntarY centers and exemplary programs 1. Title II has fostered some innovation. It has been of tremendous help to New York City and other large cities, but of less help to smaller districts. It makes possible programs on a trial basis which would otherwise never be tried. 2. The phase in-phase out feature of Title III proposals is excellent, provided local districts are willing to take on full responsibilitY for successful proposals. 3. Encouragement of formal ties betweeli schools and other local agencies is good-provides legitnila te pressure for cooperation. 4. Delay iii approval of projects and allocation of funds has hampered Title III projects more than others. There has been difficulty with last-minute staffing and coordination with other agencies. Long-range planning is especially im- portant for Title III. 5. There have been difficulties in reallocation of line item funds as unforeseen mieeds arise and original estimates prove incorrect. 0. Districts which already have resources for planning make the best pro- posals. while others have the greatest needs. Districts must be provided with resources for planning. 7. While Title iii proposals go directly to the federal government, they are usually approved by state departments of eduction. The states in this area have used this power to encourage regionalizatiofl or "clustering" of districts. A single district or airency (e.g.. study council) is designated as applicaiit and administrator of the "pac.kage'~ proposal. While there have been some benefits from this (e.g., cooperiIti01~. reduction of overlaP, more efficient programs 1. some (.reati'se ideas by individual districts have been lost. Local creativity is forced ilitO the mold of the package. RegionahiZiltiofl 01' (lustering is good for small PAGENO="0756" 1578 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS districts and doesn't affect very large districts, but it is hard on medium-sized districts (e.g., Levittown) whose innovative proposals are often overlooked In the insistence on a large, single, regional package. S. Title III projects have not been carefully evaluated and their results dis- seminated. Title IF-Regional laboratories 1. Regional labs have had little discernible effect on local districts but this is probably due to the fact that they have not had enough time to prove themselves. 2. Some geographic areas have been completely neglected by regional labs. For instance, Connecticut applied for its own regional lab but was forced to join the New England Regional Education Laboratory in Boston. (This outfit re- cently combined with a second .ini) at M.I.T.) All the activities of the New England Lab are centered in the Boston area. Connecticut feels slighted, and is becoming rebellious. 3. Programs for training researchers have been cut back. This is disastrous, since the shortage of competent researchers is holding back progress on the whole Act. 4. The Small Contract Program is underfinanced. Since this is where young researchers get the money to get started, lack of funds is serious here. 5. Basic research is being neglected and action-oriented programs are being funded. This is short-sighted. Title V-SIrengtl)Cvinq ~S~tat( departments of cducatio'n. 1. State departments of education undoubtedly are being strengthened as staff is increased and positions made. 2. Local districts have not yet felt the full impact of Title V, except that con- sultative assistance from state education departments is somewhat more avail- able. Recoin inCa (1(1 tions 1. The lai~est overall weakness in the functioning of the Act is the lack of trained maul) over. Even if all of the school districts in the country got all the money they thought they needed, it could not be spent wisely and well because the necessary 1)001 of trained manpower does not exist. Following are some suggested amendments to the Act: (a) There should be a large amount of money designated for the training of necessary personnel: teachers, administrators, researchers, evaluation specialists, project designers, systems analysts, and the like. The teacher shortage is not severe if we use older notions of need but if we want to staff sufficiently to meet modern standards, the shortage is pronounced. The manpower shortage throughout education is very serious, and is the first priority item. tb) Funds should be increased for in-service institutes to up-date teachers in all fields. (c) Funds should be allocated to train sub-professionals for service in the schools. (ci) Money should be appropriated to develop new leaders for American e'Iur;ition. This money should lie spent for further research on characteris- tics of good leaders, so that they can be selected from the large number asprilig to 0(l11Ii1ii5tr~1tive lsts. There should be funds to support intern- ships for adiiinistra tors. so that Ii one will step into a leadership post w-ith- )ut on-the-j b tra illing. Iii 11(1(1 ition. there should be money for in-service workshops for administrators now on-the-job. 2. Now is the tilmie to insider changing the basis for the distribution of funds to school districts from categorical aid to a national foundation program. I am in agreement with the attached docunient. Time Role of the Federal Uovernntent in tie Ycors Ahead, by Howard Jones, Dean, School of Education, University of Iowa. 3. Title IV should be greatly expanded. In my opinion Title IV is now the Achilles heel of the Act, since it should provide the knowledge base for education to move ahead and it is not doing it. The Small Contract Program should be at least doubled. The research training program should be rescued from extinction, and needs a vast increase in funding. The basic research program needs tremen- dous emphasis, and it is not now getting support from within the Office itself. PAGENO="0757" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTATION AMENDMENTS 1579 4. The whole Act needs to be Put CU a businesslike footing. Monies are now appropriated late, programs are imfln(Ufled with proposals expected in three or four weeks, an(l the At is adniiiiisteiU as thwgh it will dis:ippe~ir tomorrow. The Regional Labs, for instance, have been under the gun ever since they were first founded. They receive short-terai budgets. get constant reappraisals, and are not encouraged to develop long-range planning, which is essential. 5. There is need for a national board to develop policies and to evaluate cur- riculuin and material trends. We must develop more of a national posture to- wards education. and such a board might be the first step. 6. In general I support the recommendations of the National Advisory Com- mittee on the Education of Disadvantaged Children. Chairman PERKINS. The committee will recess until 9 :30 a.m., Mon- day. On Monday we will conclude the hearings. (Whereupon, at 1 :45 p.m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at 9 :30 a.m., Monday, March 20, 1967.) PAGENO="0758" PAGENO="0759" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDI('ATION AMENDMENTS OF 1967 MONDAY, MARCH 20, 1967 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Co~IMIrrEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR, 1TTa~/iinqton, D.C. The committee met at 9 :30 n.m., pursuant to recess, in room Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Carl D. Perkins (chairman of the committee) presiding. Present: Representatives Perkins, (~arey, Meeds, Burton, Scherle, and Steiger. Staff members present : Robert E. McUord, senior specialist : H. D. Reed, ,Tr., general counsel Williaiii P. ( aul, associate general colul- sel : Bemijaimmin F. Reeves, editor; and Louise M. Dargans. research assistm~t. Chairman PEREINS. The committee will come to order. A quorum is present. Do you have any questions, Mr. Steiger ? Mr. STErnER. I do not have a date but Commissioner Howe wrote a letter to t.he superintendent of schools in Chicago, Mr. Rieman, to quote from the letter he said: We ask that the board provide a progress report on the resolution of these problems by April 11, 1967. Have you received from the schools in Chicago a progress report? STATEMENT OF PETER LIBASSI, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE SECRETARY OP HEALTIt, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS Mr. Liw~ssi. We have not had the hnal progress report l)Ut I would like to ask Mrs. Martin to report to you on the meetings we have had with the Chicago people since that letter was written. STATEMENT OF MRS. RUBY MARTIN, STAFF ASSISTANT, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, HEW Mrs. MARTIN. About a month ago we had a meeting with Mr. Red- man and the top school officials from the Chica~o school systeni. They indicated that they were interested in a title IV grant from the Office of Education in addition to another kind of grant, which I cannot recall, to do some planning to meet the problems that were raised by our report. WTe have had discussions with the school hoard since they were down lwie officially. `We have had discussions with the complainants, 1581 PAGENO="0760" 1582 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS the people who were responsible for us getting into the Chicago sclio 1 ~~tnai ion and I think we were all in agreement that we are go- I1i~ 1(1 ~i(Vi(iC ilieni with some kind of grant so they can do some plan- niii~ and talk to the complainants and decide exactly what kind of planning they are going to then do to meet this problem. ~o the report in effect is their visit clown here with us to tell us what they would (To if we would provide them with some funds and they ivould use sonic of their awn. Mr. STEIGETi. Issue ~4 called integrated education prompted all this. it. quotes at some length and I think completely as I understand what they have here. the complete report of your January 6, 1967, Office of Education analysis of the Chicago public schools. Mr. Limr~ssi. May I ask who puts out that publication? T5nfortu- nately it caine on Saturday. Mr. STETGEI~. It is published by Integrated Education Associates. The board of directors is a very distinguished group including Kenneth (~lark. (`hiamles (`o~ien. and ft \V. Foster, Jr. In the report that they quote in here, and I do not. want to read all of this but in the third section regarding boundaries and student assignment policies it says: In the basis of our analysis thus far, we share the conclusion reached by the Board's Advisory Panel on Integration of the Public Schools and other observers that by far the greatest part of the segregation in Chicago's public schools results from residential segregation combined with the board's neighborhood school policy. "We recommend that the board engage competent specialists to assist them in preparing a plan appropriate to Chicago. drawing on the wide range of administrative remedies which have been adopted by other school districts to lessen segregated education and indeed, to reverse trends of increasing segre- gation here where possible. As the board is aware number of different steps are being proposed to deal with this problem. But no particular action is alone sufficient for a metro- politan center. A combination of actions over time is needed; commitment in fact by school authorities to the goal of reducing segregation in education is fundamental. The U.S. Office of Education will provide all possible assistance and support in this matter, but we reiterate our recommendation that specialist services are necessary to work on this problem. This is where you are now in trying to provide grant money to the Chicago school system to hire specialists to prepare a plan. Mr. Liu~~ssi. That is ri~ht. Mr. STEIGE1I. If the problem results from residential segregation combined with the board's neighborhood school policy, what you are really saving is that you are trying to find a way to break the neigh- boorhood school policy. Is that appropriate? Mr. Liin~ssr. No. there was evidence that the research and part. of the report. to the Chicago school authorities noted that while to a substantial extent the segregation was due to residential housing con- ditions, t.he report discussed othe.r action of the board which could not have been explained other than by the fact of race in t.he assign- inent of children to schools. I don't know if that document quotes the full report. but there was some rather strong language used in the report to indicate while residential housing was part of the problem it was not the total ex- PAGENO="0761" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDICATION AMENDMENTS 15~3 planation for the racial concentration in the Chicago schools and while there was not a proven, deliberate ~egregat 101 by tile ~ch~oh officials~ there was reasollable quest mu oii it. The. object here is to afford the school offiHals as niuch assistance as is possible in redesigning the attendance areas. this may lesuit in simply enlarguig attendance areas and not necessailly in the abolition of the neighborhood school but enlarging the neit.tiìborhood served by particular schools. The problem of feeder patterns may change. (`llildrell instead of traveling l~ minutes to a. junior high school may travel ~i) minutes to a different junior liit~li school and, therefore. decrease tile segrega- tion of the school system, so the abolition of the neighborhood school is not the single means by which von can ie(lUce racial concentrations. In some cases it is necessary to do that l)lit ill others it is not. Mr. STEIGER. One of the other points that is touched on in the report is the question of faculty assignments patterns. In here there are quoted four principles-four principal actions which the Office of Education felt were needed to modify the faculty assignment pattern. They make the point obviously that. there is a very real problem here in terms of the concentration of Negro teaching in Negro schools and whites in white schools without much interchange. One of the sections here indicates that the hoard should- 1. Assume much greater res~)onsil)ility rega rdu~g teacher assign- ment. 2. Increase the proportion of experienced teachers in disadvan- taged schools. This could include limiting, more than is done under current board policy, the transfer of experienced teachers to those schools already having a high proportion of experienced teachers. I wonder if you want to just develop this a little bit. The point here is again made, of course, Ihat really it is the teacher policy or the education association policy perhaps which says that. a more. ex- perienced teacher has the ability to transfer to a moie desirable school. WThen you get into this area on are really striking at what the teacher can and cannot do a little hit. What I would really like to know is what kind of work your office. has done and the Office of Education in working with either the Chicago Federation of Teach- ers or the Chicago Education ~ssociation in attempting to try to re- verse its transfer policy or urging them to not. transfer out of the less desirable schools into the more desirable schools. Have you spent time with the teachers organizations on this problem? Mr. Lia.~ssi. I am not. too familiar with that respect. Mrs. MARTIN. One of the items in the planning grant was funds to arrange for the Chicago school personnel people to sit. down with the Chicago teachers union to discuss their ideas, the teachers union ideas about how they could help to encourage new teachers, experienced teachers to go int.o the ghetto schools and how their suggestions as to how the school system encouraged experienced teachers to move from the better schools into the ghetto type schools. I think a substantial amount of time and money will he spent in this grant which is forthcoming with just meeting and discussing this PAGENO="0762" 1584 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS problem with the teachers union, which of course is a very powerful organizatioii in Chicago. Mr. SmIGER. There is also the basic problem not only were there more Negro teachers in the Negro schools but those teachers white and Negro in the Negro schools were generally less qualified or less ex- perienced by the board's own standards than were the white and Negro teachers in the more desirable schools. So it was not just a problem of racial segregation of teachers as it was a problem of the ex- perience and competence and background of the teachers. Is the policy in Chicago at this point, do you know, to allow rather complete freedom of the teacher to transfer where he wants to go? Mrs. MARTIN. It is based on experience. A teacher with experience has the right to a vacancy in a prestige-type school as opposed to some- one newly coming into the school system. It is really very complicated. Just. take the examination itself, the national teacher exam. If you place very high on that in Chicago you have first chance at choosing which school you want to go to. The people with the lowest score on the exa.m or the people who are going into the worst type teaching situations, that is just a brandnew teacher, so you can imagine what rights teachers already in the sys- tem have. If you have a year's experience you have rights over and beyond peop1e~ new coming in to get reassigned to a prestige-type school. Mr. STEIGER. Is the policy at this point of the Chicago school sys- tem to make an arbitrary assignment of those who do not score as well or who do not have the background and experience to assign them to a Negro school? Mrs. MARTIN. That is usually all that is left. The people who score highest have the first choice of where they want to go and they usually go to the best teaching situations, which is usually the prestige school or the predominantly white school. As you go down the list with the people with lower scores, their selection is limited by what has already gone ahead of them so usually the only thing left for them would be the school in the ghetto-type school, the predominantly Negro, or all Negro school. Mr. STEIGER. In your judgment is there a method by which we can attack this problem of faculty assignments? Do you foresee that it is possible to overcome this? Mrs. MARTIN. Certainly the assignment of faculty or teachers is a responsibility of the school board. The fact that there is a strong teachers association in Chicago certainly complicates the problem. In the South we have encouraged school districts to make racial assignments-nonraci~jl assignments and we have encouraged them to have combat~ pay, for example. You might want to pay these teachers $200 extra, or you might want to give them some additional credits, whatever it is, some incentives for going into a different kind of situa- tion. If there was not a teachers union in Chicago. a strong one which we do not have in the South generally-we don't have a strong teachers union-if there was not one in Chicago then the school board could do pretty much what it wanted to do in assigning teachers. The fact that there is a teachers union complicates the problem but the school PAGENO="0763" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1585 board cannot abdicate its resl)ollSibihty by assigning teachers to schools by saying what we can do. I believe they have a responsibility to work it out aiid let them suggest to tile school board the kind of incentives or encouragements that teachers would have to have iii order to go into a different kind of teaching situation. Mr. STEIGER. ~\Vhile it is true that the school board cannot abdicate its leS1)Onsil)ility, imeitlier caii tile teachers union abdicate its iespon- sibility. You have a two-way street here. Mrs. MARTIN. They have to work together and a 1)alt of the plan- ning grant that Chicago wants to get going is for the personnel peO- ple from the school district to sit down with the union people to try to work out sonie ideas and plans for encouraging good teachers, the experienced teachers to go into the ghetto-type school. Mr. Lin~~ssi. 1111 ight add, if I may, the heart of the problem is how do we communicate to the teachers that these schools are desirable status schools w-here if they had the feeling with higher educational standards, if they had the feeling that it was going to be major educa- tional effort made in the school then they would become desirable ex- pe1~ie1ICeS. But as long as they are overcrowded, the inadequate educational program, disciplinary problems, shortage of remedial aids for the children, lack of equipment, you are really asking a teacher to take on a situation where it is going to be almost impossible for a good teacher to work creatively, so I think we both have to develop incen- tives but we also have to get at the school itself and inviting educa- tional challenge for the teacher rather thaim a nightmare of discipline. Mr. STEIGER. May I touch on the-on what the gentleman from New York, Mr. Scheuer, mentioned to you and encourage you to pro- Vi(ie for the committee w-hat you are clomg in the quiet persilitsion process. I think this is very important. He mentioned what the New York human relations group is doing. In Wisconsin we have our governors on human rights operating on this same kind of a basis. I think this would be beneficial and useful from our standpoint as well as from yours, to have this kind of information. Also I asked on Saturday whether or not you had any indication as to the number of complaints that you have received. Do you have that information this morning? Mr. Liiv~ssi. No, I am ~oriv I do not have the milI1lI1)el of com- plaints we received but I did find out that we do visit all school super- intendents in all cases of the nature of the complaints that have been filed against them and we do contact them first when we go into a community so that they are aware of the nature of the complaiiits that have been filed both North and South. You pressed the point that you felt it important that we communi- cate with them and that. is the policy and that is being followed b the. staff. I don't have the nUml)er of complaints Lv State today but we will ~et that up and we will have it, I would hope, by tomorrow or the-for the record. Chairman PERKINS Without objection the data will be inserted in the record. PAGENO="0764" 15S6 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS (The documents referred to appear on page 1616.) Mr. STEIGEIm. You say the nature of the complaint; is this the com- plaint? Is it' an abstrac.t of the complaint done by your office? Mr. Liiv-~ssi. Where the complaining party has no objection, we give the school superintendent the complaint itself where they are willing to have their identity disclosed, or if they have made the fact of their complaint public to the newspaper, we then give the superin- tendent the full complaint. We give them a very detailed summary of the complaint and all of the relevant issues that are raised in the complaint. It is not a gen- eralized thing such as we know what the problems are here. We tell them of the general allegations. If it relates to the individual then we disclose the individual's name and the facts surrounding the in- dividual complaint. Mr. STEIGEIm. Since I have not read the guidelines would it be pos- sible for you to supply a copy of the guidelines for my use so I could review them? Chairman PERKINS. Without objection copies of the guidelines will be inserted in the record at this point. Mr. STEIGEII. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (The document referred to appears on page 1644.) Mr. STEIGEIm. `Would it be possible to provide a copy of Judge Wisdom's decision I do iio~ wi-h to insert it in ~he record, Mr. Chair- man, it is too long. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Carey. do you have any questions of the administration witnesses on the guidelines? Mr. CAREY. ~O. sir. Chairman PERuTNS. Mr. Mecils. Mr. MEEDS. I have not had a chance to go through all of the testi- mony, Mr. Chairman, so I have no questions at this time. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Scherle. Mr. SCHERLE. I am sorry I was not here on Saturday. This seems to he very interesting test imonv to me. May I ask what is the real cause the system of dual education has promoted all of this in Chicago? Mr. Liii~ssi. There are a variety of issues that have swept over the major urban cities in our country, both North and South and WTest. We have first of all the major population movements of nonwhites into th~ urban centers themselves taking place. particularly after th~ First W~om'1d War, hut then a second wave of northern migration of Negroes (luring the second World Wt~.r so that we have., first of all, a major shift. of the Negro population from the Southern 11 States to the Northern States. The second is we had the general deterioration of housing in the urban areas and the movement of white families from the urban centers to the. suhurl)an areas which not only was there an influx of Negroes but. there was an outward migration of whites from the urban areas. So we had developing then a l)atteril of neighborhood transition which resulted in school transition. Then in addition, the school policies themselves in northern cities have tended to accentuate and increase the segregation. For instance, some northern cities have deliberately gerrymandered school districts in order to maintain a PAGENO="0765" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1587 pattern of segregation where Negro children would be in one. school and white children would be in another. Mr. SCHERLE. Is this more prevalent in the South? Mr. LIBAssI. The children were segregated more easily by saying Negro children would go to certain schools and whites would go to certain schools. In the North most of the northern laws were repealed but we had the pattern of the school boards drawing attendance lines in such a way that the racial composition remained fairly constant. Mr. SCHERLE. In my home State of Iowa we have a migration of people coming in and going all the time. This has not affected the quality or the caliber or the curriculum. Why would this make any difference? This problem does not exist in Des Moines or other cities in Iowa. Why would there be in effect an obsession in some cases, particularly where they are talking about the equalization of the transportation of pupils? Mr. LIBAssI. Part of it is the size. There are half a million school- children in Chicago so just the. volume of the children and the number of schools and the number of teachers creates this problem which is quite different. Mr. SciirRIE. I a~Tee numi )ers are import ant 1 ut by the siune token it is just as bad for 10 as it would be. for 100. would it not? Mr. Lin~~ssi. In the smaller conimunities anything less than a mil- lion, and that is not a very small community, the cities ill the middle- size categories have been made to maintain a higher quality of school. They have maintained more integration in the schools. Even though the Negroes have moved into the communities they attend the same schools and they are not there in the numbers which convert a school from a predominantly white school to a predominantly Negro school. When that happens you get all of the factors. When the school becomes a predominantly Negro school you get a transition that results at that point which results in many of the problems. Mr. SCHERLE. You do or you think you do? Mr. LIBAs5I. The recent reports of the Civil Rights Commission and the other research that. is being clone in the field seems to indicate that when a school becomes known in the community as the Negro school, that certain factors then take place. The quality of the teaching (Toes deteriorate and the quality of the learning deteriorates. Whether it happens at any magical number I am not prepared to say. Mr. SolIviwE. What magic would theme be involved in the transpor- tation of pupIls from one neighborhood p~~smg half a dozeii schools and taking them to another? \Vhiv do you think this will enhance the school curriculum or the caliber of teachers? Mr. Lnv~ssr. In our policy we (10 not advocate that children should be transported. Let me say that the evidence indicates though that where Negro chit- dren are attend i ng sd 11)01 S which a IC ~ iedomii i ant ly white, hey do have a much more improved educational experience. If von `take Negro chihdreii and i iahspor~ thidiiI to a white S~Ii0Oh where they are in the minority. the evidence dearly ~n(i1C~L ~ ~l~rt their educai lonal experience improves. PAGENO="0766" 1 55~ ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTCATION AMENDMENTS ~\Ir. ~CIIEnLE. In Illinois (10 YOU have a bill which allows the trans- portation of all children, parochial as well as public Mr. Luy\SsI. I fllfl sorry 1 (10 not know the Illinois laW (Ill school transporta t ion. Mr. SCHERLE. What is your home state? Mr. LIB~sI. I am with tue 1)epartment of health. L(lllcatlOfl, and Welfare. I am a resident of the I)istrict although I formerly resided in New York State. I don't know the busing laws in New York State. I might say 40 percent of the children in the ITnited States are transported on school buses to schools so that school busing is certainly not anything that has come up as a result of the integration issue. Forty percent of the children in tue Fnited States ride piihl ic school buses and an untold number ride public transportation. Mr. ~CHERLE. In Iowa we allow no parochial schoolchildren on p11! 1k school buses. \Vlletiler tins law will be changed I do not know. Would you bring up to (late why ~0 mill ion was withheld in Chicago becau~e they thought there was a segregation in tile public schools? Mr. Ll13~~ssT. Back in I ~ which was prior to my joining the staff of HE%V. there were complaints that were received alleging school segregation ill the city of Chicago, and tlìe Office of Education requested the school officials in the city to provide them with illforma- tion on the operation of the schools iiid the racial composition of the sc ii ool s. The school officials did not make that information available and On tlle basis of the information that the Office of Education had and Oil tile i)~151S of the school officials' refusal to i)i'ovide additional infor- mation, the Office of Education asked the State school siiperintendeiit to defer making ad(litional payments to the city. Mr. ~cTJERLE. In other words as 1on~ as the money comes from the I~e(leral Goverumen I \v!lether t hey say there are strings or no strings attached to it. the~ Federal Government will hold the reins of fundin~ over 011(1 above all State or local (`olitrol: will they not Mi'. Lin.~~i. ~Ihe Constitution requires that the Federal funds he used only in schools operating in compliance, and the Congress- Mi. S(IIE1ILE. Wii (lid they not wait for proof rather than supposi- tion Why do this at tile eXJ)ellse of the children or the students? Mr ITIl\s~I Mv recoilection is that the deferral of funds was resci tided when the school officials agreed to provide the inforniation that was requested and the deferral lasted for a very short period of lime. - Mr. ~cHERLE. In other words the Government convicts theni before trial at tile expenses of the students Mr. Ljnts~i. The Governnient asked the schools to provide infor- mation so we could make a jll(lgment and they refused to provide us with the information. Mi'. ~ i irriir. 1)o von tIl i Ilk til is is fair? Mi. Lin~~si. I thjnk it is llloooperative of the school system. Mi. ~(`iIFflIE. You mean it is unfair to tile students? Mi'. LTW~ssT. \es: I think se~iegatioii is miiifaii to the stml(hents and I tl1imik \VlIhlllOldiilg Federimi funds is iiiìfa ii 10 the stmm(ieilts. T think it is shame \vllemi the school districts will not (lese legate aial (lepri\-e ts ~tndents of finids. PAGENO="0767" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1589 Mr. SCIIERLE. This is a rumor you have heard but no foundation? Mr. L1R~ssI. No; there was considerable evidence of segregation in Chicago. Mr. SCUERLE. What are you doing for the gifted child? Mr. Lni~~sr. There are other programs of the Office of Education which I am not competent to testify to. Mr. SCHERLE. Aren't you with the Office of Education? Mr. LIB~ssI. I am the Special Assistant to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare for Civil Rights. I was asked to testify on the Department's handling of civil rights policies and the operation of these policies particularly. Mr. SCHERLE. Who handles your programs for the gifted children? Mr. T~in~~s~i. Let me see if I can ask someone from the Office of Education? Mr. CA~Y. Would my colleague yield? Mr. SCHERLE. Surely. Mr. CAREY. I would like to respond not on the basis of complete information but briefly, there are no gifted children programs in the Office of Education. There are programs for the handicapped chil- dren, exceptional children in that terminology and recently the new Bureau for the Handicapped was set up by a bill which passed this committee last year to gather all of the special education programs under one roof down there. Many of our strong recommendations in this regard were that we look into the different levels of achievement and find out what is being done with Federal programs to sort out the children who have both functions that prevent them from getting a full education and also there are those who are not being served. Those you call gifted children were not served by the so-called equal education programs. So this is a beginning field and we have not caught up with it. The States as von realize have a number of pro- ~rams in this field but there is no Federal program for gifted chil(lren now on the books. Mr. SCHERLE. Thank you, Mr. Carey. There is no one who is any more concerned about~ the disadvantaged and the uneducated and the need for it. Because in my humble opin- ion there is nothing that is more important thaii education. I think it would be criminal for us as Congressmen or anyone in the field of education not to give every opportunity to the children today to compete in this competitive worhL to give them the dignity, the opportunity and the pride to compete so they can 1)econie self- sustaining but I do think there are a lot of questions that should be answered in the field of education as to whether or not they are all being treated with the same help perhaps disadvantaged, handicapped, and so on and so forth. I have one last question. Going back to time tiaiisportatioii of pu pils. what WOTll(l -von do in the Washingtoii area here to try to set up a ~-peicent attendance of children, eon~ideiiiig the uiai~ili~ von have at the present t line? Mr. Lmu~si. I dont believe that it is 1)ossil)le iii the city of W~ish- ington because of the organization of the I)istrict to acim ieve a ~O per- cent or any other kind of percenta~e of attendiince in the T)istiict ii aol s. PAGENO="0768" 1.590 ELEMENTAllY AND SECONDARY EDLCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. SCILERLE. If tIii~ is an example of what you are attempting to do. does this not sort of knock your argument in tiìe head a little bit? Mr. Lin~ssi. The only thing the Department~ of Health, Educa- tion. and \Veifare is doing. where a school district~ or city operates the school S stem in a way which increases or maintains segregation, that would violate tile Constitut ion, but where in a city such as the District of Columbia So or 90 pet'eiit of the children aie Negro there is not very much that. a (listrict can do. Mr. ~OIIERLE. If you feel this is the answer to Chicago and other places why would it nor serve the same purpose in Washington ? Mr. Lin~si. In time city of Chicago there were districts or resi- dent zones around schools which could have provided for more inte- gration than there was. Mr. ~c1IEflLE. But von feel that full integration of the schools is the answer to all of tile problems in education? Mr. J~IB\S~I. I think t hat tile object has to be the improvement of the quality f education. Mi. ~cIionI~. But you feel you would obtain this by full integra- tion of schools to the extent where you might even have t.o transport these cliildien our of their neighborhood. past schools they now atten(1 in an exchange to create a La lance? Mr. Liii~ss~. Let i~ie say I think every child's constitutional right~ to equal educational O1)portunity on lit to be fully l)l'otected. We have many, many instances of chil(lren being put on buses, trans- ported pi~s~ schools to at.tend segretrated schools and tills was the pat- tern for ears where Negro child~en were put on buses and driven right past white schools to attend all Negro sciiools and people thought that was a good way to have educational systems. Mr. SCJIEuLE. You thought that was wrong and now you feel this is right? Mr. Liiv~ssi. I feel local school officials should take whatever action in their judgment increases the educational opportunity for all chil- dren in that district and if in their judgment it means children should be transported on a Lus, if that is their judgment, then I think that is what ~liould be ilone. Mi. ~ m unit:. ~ it Viii II [imielit or time asSumption of this law, that i t1i-~ k [(Ole ci iaJd create equality von are looking for iii voimr I )ejcur lliOllt Mr. Li ;ui~I. lhiii is iuot the pol icy of the T)epartine.nt.. The only policy of the Department is where a local school district, wants to transport children l)ecause they feel the children would get a better opportunity, then the Federal Government is not opposed to getting funds to do that. Mr. Sc'lIERLE. You will force them to do that if you feel they are not getting tile kind of education because you provide the funds to run that school. Mr. Lui tssi. \Ve have not in an case required that in any north- ern school district- Mr. SCIIERLE. What do you call tile $30 million in Chicago? Mr. Liivtssi. We. (lid require or suggest to the school officials in Chicago that they ShOUl(l put-they should bus tile children. We were simnlv at that noint trying to get information. What we have PAGENO="0769" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1591 required of Chicago is that they look at their zonilig patterns, that they look at the Tines they have drawn for schools, that they look at the feeder patterns, that they look at their faculty assignment proce- dures and come up with a plan that will assure there is iio discriinina- tion. Mr. SCHERLE. In other words. you had to give the Okay with the information that they afforded to you that what they did was right in your mind to provide the kind of education that they should have in a city probably about a thousand miles away from Washington. Mr. Linxssi. There was 110 clout 1111(1 is no etb)rt on our part to try to run the city of Chicago public schools on the issue of race. It is far too big a problem. What we have been trying to fund and stimulate is for the local officials to work on their own P~"~ and tell us how they want to do it. Mr. Sciiriwr. In the end result you will govern how they think and how they should act. Mr. LIB~\ssI. Congress has told us that the I)epartment must not provide, funds if children are being discriminated against so we must assure that children are not being (liscriminatedi against or being ex- cluded from a program. This is a direction from Congress. Mr. SCHEIILE. But the school boards and the department of public instruction shall not be the determining factor of whether they are or not, you will? i\Ir. LIBASSI. ultimately the courts. Mr. SCIIERLE. You will. Mr. LIB~~ssI. W~e initially and then the school authorities may ap- peal that judgment to the courts, that is right. Mr. SCIIERLE. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Meeds. Mr. MEEDS. I have now had an opportunity to go through your testimony and I would like to compliment you on your prepared testimony and also on your efforts to answer some very difficult ques- tions. May I ask just generally your feeling about the transfer or the pro- posed transfer by some people of the Headstart program to the De- partment of llealth, Education, and W~e1fare ? have you people con- sidered this in the field of civil rights at all? Mr. L~~~ssi. W~e have been concerned that all of the. p1~io~l and special summer programs particularly which were adniini~teied l)y the Office of Economic Opportunity adopt and implement a civil rights policy which was consistent with what the Office of Educct ion was requiring. As long as the programs are in the Office of Economic Opportunity, they will be and we will be following the same policy with 1'eSl)eCt to similar programs. The transition either way will not result in tile civil rI~i1ts policies that govern those programs. \Ve do require complete and hnniedmte desegregation of sumlner programs and cpecial p~e~chool l)rouiams. Mr. MEEI)S. I notice ifl your testimony °n pe~e 7 von point out that SS percent of the Negro cllildrelI in 11 5)Ilthleln States ~ nt inue to at- tcn ii ~ehnn1 s whieie student bodies are all or mci u'ly all ~ 73-492--G7----Pt. 2-49 PAGENO="0770" 1592 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Do von feel with the uiudelines you presently have that if the Hearstart program were shifted to the Office of Education, that you would l)e able to implement your program fast enough and that we would not have the situation existing in Ileadstart programs? Mr. Limi~ssr. I wish I could tell von I was absolutely consistent that would hapl)en. We have sent 0111 several letters from the Corn- missioner of E~liicat ion to the chief, state school officers and if the committee wishes I would he glad to submit those for the record which would indicate the efforts we have made to be sure these Headstart programs remained fully desegregated. I can assure you we will insist on the same level of desegregation that OEO has required in any transition of those programs into the Office of Education. Mr. MEnDS. ~s a matter of fact, it is quite possible, is it not, that it would take several years even if your very excellent guidelines and the implementation of these to assure any substantial desegregation in Headstart programs were this program shifted over to the Office of Education ? Mr. LIJIASSI. We will not fund segregated, preschool programs. That is, if a school district, and on inspection we find this and we ask for a statistical report, if we found school districts operating segre- gated Headstart programs in the Office of Education w-e would not fund those programs and in fact the school districts would jeopard- ize all Federal funds if they did. We allow for a gradual desegregation of the school system but wheii it comes to the Head'~tart programs these must be operated initially and completely on a desegregated basis. There is no freedom of choice basis in Heacistart programs. Mr. MEEDS. Let me compliment you on that policy. Mr. C~i~y. I am very much interested in this critical discussion on the possibility of desegregation of Headstart facilities if the Depart- ment takes on a larger role in the administration of Headstart pro- grams. I say you insist that Headstart programs be fully initiated. WThiere have you achieved this? Mr. LTBASST. The Office of Education in the Hea(Istart programs 1~as required that the programs be staffed and operated in such a way as to provide for the maximum desegregation. Mr. CAREY. I am well aware with what they are doing and T am fully in accord with what they are doing but von say that in the I)epartrnent of Health, Education, and Welfare program that the Headstart program be desegregated from the start. Now you name me one school district~ where there is a desegregated pattern for Headstart where you have been successful in desegregating from the beginning? Mr. Lir~.~ssj. T do not have it with me but I would be glad to I)I~o- vide the committee the percentage of segregation in Headstart pro- grams and the desegregation in other classes so we can see these as well in comparison. Mr. CAREY. You say you will furnish information on the extent of desegregation of Headstart programs. On your testimony a few moments ago you could not have any desegregation of Hendstart pro- PAGENO="0771" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDITCATION AMENDMENTS 1593 grams because as a matter of policy they must start with integrated programs. Mr. LIB~ssi. I guess I am missing the term when we talk about }Teadstart programs. I am referring basically to special programs which would be funded under title I by the Office of Education and the State departments. \Ve have not run any State department programs and I did not mean to use that term. Mr. CAREY. I wanted the record to be (lear that the T)epartment of health. Education, and \Velfare has had no experieflce~ has had no previous opportunity to institute T-Teadstart programs and therefore could give us no recOr(l on what success you might have in getting integrated l-ieadstart programs in those districts where segregation 15 i~ problem. This is true, is it not.? Mr. Lin.ussi. It is true in the sense von used the word Headstart program but the Office of Education has funded preschool programs under title I. Mr. CAiiEY. In that connection, will you furnish the committee with complete data. on preschool programs which von have successfully integrated from the very first day of attendance of these children iii SchOOl districts where the district does not meet the guideline of all desegregation? Mr. Lin~ssi. W~e will provide information on the extent of deseg- regation of preschool progriumns funded under title i in school districts that are in the process of achieving full desegregation and have as yet done that. We will furnish that information for the committee. Mr. (~\REY. I hope you will make this information quite precise because it will be vital to those of us who are looking for successful Headstart programs, and to programs where less than success is a pattern. (The document referred to appears on page lG~l.) ~\ri~. Liw~ssr. Ion are touching on a very crucial problem because we found there was some evidence of school districts shifting from the TTeadstart program under OEO to using title I funds from OEO in order to run segregated preschool programs and we. were very concerned about that and that stimulated a joint effort on our part with OEO. Mr. C~\BEY. I thank you for getting to what then is the next and key point of my questioning here. To restate that, you have found in experience that there have been patterns and trainees of school districts moving over to preschool away from Headstart in order to effectuate or maintain patterns of segregation? ~\Er. Luu ~si. Yes, sir: and whenever those cases came to our attention we made very clear that we would not allow title I to be abused as a maintenance of segregation in order to avoid the policies of OEO. Mr. C~~REY. If my colleague would yield further I ontv wish this room were filled now with all of those State superintendents and State administrators who come here from the Northern States and give us their lipservice on integration and then ask in toto for T-Teadstart progrftms over to the Office of Education and skip this problem en- PAGENO="0772" 1594 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS tirely as if it were not happening. I wish they filled this room today so they could respond to this comment. Mr. MELDS. I would like to pursue this a little further. One of tile methods which has been found effective under the Office of Economic Opportunity when segregation is not proceeding fast enough or is not achieved in areas where the Office of Economic Opportunity has had lleadstart programs was to carry these on in private inst itut ions or through parochial institutions and schools. Do you understand that you would be able to do that with the law as presently written Mr. LIBASSJ. I am not sure on that question. I am not capable of answering that. Mr. MELDS. I tell you, you could not. So at least as the law is presently written, this is one of the methods of achieving desegregation used by the Office of Economic Oppor- tunity which would not be favorable to you; is that right? Mr. Lin~ssi. That is right. Mr. MEEDS. I think t1ia'~ is all. Mr. CAREY. The gentleman from California, Mr. Burton. Mr. BURTON. How many people do you have working in your par- ticular area Mi. J~ii;.~~i. In the Office of Education trying to handle all of the school pioblems in the South, we have 43 professional staff people attempting to work with the 5,000 school districts in the South. At the last count we had about eight that were trying to work on all of the school problems of the North and that is the extent of the pro- fessional staff. Mr. BURTON. What kind of staff background-staff backup do you have ? Mi. Lin.~s~r. There will be stenographic and clerical, but that is the entire administrative executive program planning, research, that is the full professional staff. Mr. BURTON. So there are 43 professional staff people working in how many Southern States? Mr. l~in~s~r. In the 17 Southern States. Mr. Bunrox. And there are five.? Mr. Lina~sj. I believe there are eight that are at this time work- ing on the l)roblem of northern schools. Mr. BURTON. When was your part of the HEW set up? Mr. Lii~~~r. The (1)111cc of Educatioii began working on school desegregation in July of 1964. It had no appropriation for the pro- nram that year and the. staff was reassigned to the job. It was not until the following year that they got their first appropriation, in July Of I I would he glad to provide for the committee, the amount of funds avu iTaLIc for the adniin istration of title VI in the schools of the country, and I would also he glad to provide the exact figures on profe~s~onnl and clerical staff that are employed. But it is not ade- (mate to 1m1ovi(le the assistance to school districts that they need in order to plan for orderly desegregation. It is very thin. Mi. B~iiiox. Could von provide us with the annual dollar amounts and per~nuneL irofe~ional staff, for each of the last 3 fiscal years. whi cli i~ the period of time that you have been discussing? PAGENO="0773" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS 1595 Mr. Lin~ssi. Yes; I will do that and I will indicate. what. we are asking in the next fiscal year. Mr. BURTON. Does 1-JEW's request for the next fiscal year contain a precise amount for your own part of the shop Mr. LIBAssI. Yes; we have a centralized account for civil rights and we can identify the exact amounts of money that we are request- ing from Congress for civil rights and what portion of that will be assigned to the Office of Education to carry out civil rights activities. Mr. BL1~TON. how much was appropriated this past year. (10 you remember? Mr. LIBAssI. For the l)epa.rtment as a whole it was *~,()()() for the entire Department including the Public health Service, Weif are Administration, and the vocational rehabilitation agencies, and so on. Mr. BURTON. How much will have been spent at the end of this year Mr. Lui~ssi. All of that will have bee~i spent 1)1115 more in the sense that the beginning of the last fiscal year we were not under a centralized account and exceeded the $3,385,000. We exceeded it by at least $1 million; so it was roughly $4,385,000 that was spent. Mr. BURTON. During this period of the past. year centralized ac- counts were set up? Mr. Liiv~ssi. That is right. Mr. BURTON. How much is being requested in the centralized ac- counts? Mr. L~AssI. Approximately $5.400.000 is being requested for IOG$. Mr. BURTON. Was that being requested from you to HEW, HEW to the Bureau of the Budget, or the administration to the Congress? Mr. LIB~~ssI. It w-as the administration to the Cou~ress. That was the total amount. We have 278 positions in the entire Depart- ment on civil rights, professional and clerical, 278 positions, profes- sional and clerical, and we are asking for a total of 409, which, just to do a little arithmetic here-409 and 278, 1~1 additional positions. That includes the General Counsel's staff, the regional office staff, and all of the elements in the Departrnei~t. Mr. BURTON. How much of appropriation request for next. year ic- flects new staff positions and how much of it reflects a redefinition of responsibility for reallocation of existing staff positions to this effort? Mr. LIBAssr. I am sorry; I am not quite sure I get the point of the question. Mr. BURTON. Will these be entirely new positions or will these l)e positions that have long since been filled and tucked away in IIEWT but now will he credited to the civil rights efforts? Mr. LIBAssI. No; we are very careful not to excee(l since the cen- tralized account w-as established in the last. appropriation act.: we have been very careful not to exceed that appropriation. `We do not have 278 l)eoPle on hoard at the present. time working in this, and we are staffing up to that point, but there are not other people tucked away kind of performing this out of other funds. PAGENO="0774" 1596 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS `l'here is ho (OiltliblitiOii since the al)propriatiOns act was signed by the President: there is no contribution from any other program to fun(l the~ Department's civil rights activity. Mr. BURTON. Aiii I correct in aSsunhing a good part of your work is providing the technical know-how to school districts dint seek to coiiiplv ~ L that a fair portion of your responsibility or is by far the over- whelming portion of your work that of enforcement ? Mr. Liiiu~si. You are right. Most of the staff is devoted to the review- of the performance of school (listricts, hospitals, and so forth, and providing technical assistance, advice, and counsel as to how the recipient of Federal funds can desegregate the facility and comply with the title VI. The General Counsel Office is the enforcement unit. in IIEW~ and that~ is authorized at 39 positions out~ of the 278. So the funds termina- 11011 p~'*~ of tile program is much smaller. The staff that is engaged in l)1'Oviding a technical assistance, if the school district refuses the technical assistance, then the case has to proceed to the fund cutoff and the same staff would be asked to testify at a hearing to provide information on their refusal to desegregate. I don't want to draw- a neat, clear line that just the 39 people in the general counsel's office have anything to do with fund deterni ma- tions. The rest of the staff is doing nfl of the voluntary compliance which if successful avoids the cutoff but if it is not successful then the case iiioves to the general counsel's office for the actual hearing to terminate the funds. Mr. Bell just said even the general counsel's office engages in negotia- tions and severance cases if possible even after they have beeii cited for a hearing. Mr. BFRTON. What are the prospects in the next decade to eliminate segregation in the grade schools and junior high schools of this coun- try in the large cities Is it rather dismal at best ? Are we not really confronted with the fact that if we do all of this we caii with the~ available tools we will just show- a little retrogression \li'. LTB~SST. Let inc say that we (0111(1 do a great deal iii Ii) years to reduce racial se regation in the piihl ic schools in the Fnited States. `We could do a great, great deal. There 15 110 doubt iii iiiy mind there is ample room in hioth the North and the South for the reduction of racial concentiat ions in public schools. It does take awhile and it does take commitment and it also takes money. With those I believe w-e could. There are obvious situations ~uch as large, large metropolitan areas where there are extensive racial concentrations in the cities as a whole. I understand there are about five cities now- where school l)oPulations are more than 50 percent- nonwhite. Tn those cities it will l)e iieces- sarv for the cities in the surrounding communities to (Tevelop sonic kind of new educational system which will both improve the quality of education and also aflord a greater opportunity for a dese~regated ed ii cation. Mr. BFRTON. You have not answemed my question at all. In -your very large cities where von have ever increasing numbers of school- PAGENO="0775" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTCATION AMENDMENTS 1597 age children living in monolithic ghettos. is the prospect bright or dim that the best efforts at the State, Federal, or lo~al level will nierelv reduce the rate of segregation in the schools? Mr. LIBAssI. I guess I have to say I come down on a pessimistic note. My staff advises me my optimism is without foundation and I am surrounded by pessimists, but I do feel (lespite the fact that there is increasing Negro population in the cities that if we wanted to we could establish and improve the educational systems of our cities which to a level where white families would be willing to remain in cities, where white families would be attracted to cities and schools in which city and suburban school districts would cooperate in operating and maintaining educational facilities which would provide high quality. Now I must say that this takes a depth of understanding of the problem and it takes a willixigness to face the racial issue in our country and it takes effort and the pessimists on the staff to say it is not likely too that America is going to mobilize that kind of commit- ment to equal educational opportunity. I would still like to think that the country does wamit to solve this problem. Mr. CAREY. Would my colleague yield? Mr. BURTON. I yield. Mr. CAREY. I thank you for yielding so I can pursue this point. Then Lawrence Crimmins, the distinguished historian in education at Columbia stated thai in the large city schools the parents of the fortu- nate, those who have the means to do so were displaying or demonstrat- ing a time-honored right of American people who were dissatisfied with anything. They were indulging in withdrawal as a form of pro- test from the major public school systems of the city of New York and other cities. We all read that the city of New York now joins those cities with more than 50 perce1~t nonwhite enrollment in its public schools. This is far more serious than it appears because we say we have reached the millenium we have one white child and one nonwhite child going together to school. This is not so. It appears so on the surface. In some school districts we have gone to 80 to 90 percent nonwhite in some there is 90 percent all white, and there has been a continued exodus from the city so the percentage now drops to 50-50. Your optimism is laudable and it is wonderful we have von thinking that way. I am interested in this from the viewpoint of our experience and I think the experience that has been characteristic of the South would be the experience that would he characteristic of the North in this regard. For instance since the Civil Rights Act of 1964, your statement at page - you indicate that the number of Negro students attending desegregated schools has increased markedly. In 1964, it was 2.25 percent: in 1065, 6 percent: and in September 1966. 12 percent. These would be impressive figures if we knew one thing. How does the overall school attendance in these areas of white students compare with the number of white births and how does the number of Negro students compare with Negro births 6 years prior to these times? PAGENO="0776" 1595 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTCATION AMENDMENTS In other words, in the interim classes are the whites staying in the schools as Negroes come in or do these increased percentages indicate more Negroes attending schools where there are fewer whites, as we know it to obtain in the northern cities \ow would you demonstrate that pattern or simply indicate the lack of such a pattern? Mr. Lin~s~i. We can provide the statistics which will show the numbers of white children who were in the schools and are in the schools by State. but I must admit that the very few numbers of Negro children going to desegregated schools which I referred to in the testi- mony is certainly outweighed by the increasing racial segregation of Negro children throughout the country as a whole. We are not making progress. We are losing ground in extending desegregated education for Negro children. There is very definitely an exodus of white children to parochial schools in the cities and to the suburbs. Frequently the movement out is- Mr. CAREY. May I at this point object? I have heard the state- ment before there is an exodus into the pam~ochia]. schools in the cities and suburbs. How do you account for the fact that. the statistics this year indicate that for the first time since 1964 the number of children attending at least one denominational Catholic parochial school declined for the first. time in that period? Where do you get. the figures to support your statement when records indicate the attendance has dropped for the first time since 1 946? Mr. LIBASSI. The Civil Rights Commission report noted that the numbers of children, white children in the cities-that the racial com- position of the parochial schools in the cities is disproportionately white where as the public schools, the student composition is dispro- portionately Negro. Mr. CAREY. Again where do you get your figures? The studies I have been able to obtain and which I have been reading very care- fully indicate in the parochial school system of the city of New York the number of Negro children and minority children have markedly increased. Mr. LTBASSI. I do not mean to suggest that Negroes are not at- ten ding parochial schools. Mr. CAREY. More Negroes are attending parochial schools than ever l)efore. Mr. LIBASsI. The key reason gets to the very heart of your ques- tion. The key rea~on why Negro parents are sending their children to parochial schools is the same reason white families are doing that- for sending their children to the parochials-and that is, the quality of education in the parochial schools is superior. Mr. CAREY. Why don't. we say the unsayable thing here? How are we going to achieve desegregation unless we give true freedom of choice to the parents to go out and seek quality of education where- ever he can find it? Take the Negro family where we have a family unit that really wants-and I think every family unit. really wants-the best opportu- nities for its children. It looks like the school system has forced par- PAGENO="0777" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTJCATION AMENDMENTS 1599 ents to send their children to other schools because freedom of choice is available SO the family says the only quality nearby is one. of the iiondenominatioflal private schools or parochial schools. Again with limited tuition and available space use, what. true free- dom of choice does a family have unless you give it the means to attend school? Mr. LIB~~ssI. I have a freedom of choice to attend my schools. Most Negro families do have that choice. Mr. C~~REY. You cannot mobilize the community to improve the quality of the schools. Mr. LmAssI. I could not agree with you more. I thmk the Federal Government should he able to provide financial assistance to schools or others to help disadvantaged children receive a quality education. The reason for lily optimism there are school districts and school superintendents that are planning for the expanding of the opportunity of Negro children and providing the traflsI)ortation to do it and are using Federal funds. Mr. CAREY. Isn't it true historically as our funds have grown up educational opportunities have followed the pocketbook to a great. degree and in effect we do have subsidized private education for all but the disadvantaged children? By that I mean in the secretary's book, excellence, or self-renewal, one of his volumes, both of which I think are highly important writ- ings in this whole problem of quality educat.ion and he makes a ref- erence to the Scarsdale, N.Y., school system which is theoretically an open enrollment public school system, but as a matter of actuality as a matter of practical consideration if you don~t have the money to pay the. high school tax and the high cost of property in the Scarsdale area you cannot attend that school system. Yet the economic barrier is there and yet it. receives just as much money for support as the disadvantaged school district in central Flarlem so the Scarsdale children have all this aiid heaven too. They have very clear demarcation of barriers through property tax and control of the school system which prevents disadvantaged families from moving into those schools. Th is the so-called anomaly in educational systems. If a non- denominational private school offering quality education would open up in the middle of Harlem and I know six schools that are not eligible for $1, isn't. it a paradox~ and the other one is starting and the one is completely supported and the other is not. Mr. LIBASSI. I think the denial of education by geography~ the in- come of your parents, the ability or capacity to move into a particular neighborhood is hardly one we should be proud of. I dont think our educational system is fulfilling its function of affording all children a full life. When we restrict Negro families to particular neighborhoods or cities and deny them the opportunity to move into the suburbs, we have very unequal educational opportunity in the country. Mr. CAREY. Isn't it also t.rue the appalling and frightening aspect of this is that not only this pattern develops but also the prospect is not PAGENO="0778" 1600 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS that larger in1)uts of money will have to be made available to correct atid restore equality of education. The l)i'oSPect at this time is it is going to get worse. As those who can afford to move out, and as the percentage of Negro children in- creases in a given school district, the quality denominator moves down because the association of the children with greater learning oppor- ~unities is lost, the children who are in there are faced with a more ob- lique prospect that the ghettoization is going to continue and the sense of achievement and hope for progress in their lives is very badly mitigated and in a sense the school becomes worse and worse and each day despite the installation of money to try to do more, with new buildings, new books, audiovisual materials, what we can really only do by the completed education experience. lIsn~t it true these schools are going to get worse in the cities and the exodus is going to grow more rapidly and more drastically? Isn't this the true picture? Mr. LIBASSI. There isa growing body of evidence that supports the proposition that merely improving the physical environment of the school does not improve the quality of education, that the key factors which affect education are the socioeconolnjc and educational status of the child himself and of his classmates and they are segre- gated schools regardless of their size, the physical environment, the equipment, the nionev that is being poured into it will not~ provide and (10 not make up for the disadvantage of being in a socioeconomic caThy segregated school. Of course race then adds to it. While the money is essential we cannot ignore the fact that the money cannot overcome segregation. Mr. BFRTuN. I would like to a~k the (`Iiaii a question if I may be- cause I find this discussion very enlightening. Woulcl the elimination of financing in this tend to negatively or favorably affect what I fear is the trend in terms of the urban ghetto schools? Is it a valid concern that motivated parents when they are no longer con fronted with the liniiiieial ol)stacle ale going to take their children out of the pui)1 ic schools, leaving more of the children of the unino- ti\ilted f~tiiiilies Will that accelerate what may well be virtually an irreversible trend in terms of the ghetto schools ? I am not sure what the response to that is. As I understand that which has been discussed is that some parents and kids should not be disadvantaged merely because they come from an economic setting that does not permit them all the options which we think are important in a democratic society. Viewing society as a whole, what happens to those kids in the fam- ilies where they dont have a parent or parents that have sufficient motivation to exercise these options or ideas, and what if everybody does, what happen~~ to the public school system? Mr. CAREY. If we can have a colloquy here I am pleased to respond in that regard. What happens to General Motors when Chrysler puts out a new model ? What happens to Cadillac when the Mustangs started to steal the automobile sales? The answer is competition improves the product for both sides. That has been the American theory and the Amer- ican practice throughout our history. PAGENO="0779" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDtCATION AMENDMENTS 1601 If persons start rejecting something based upon the fact that it does not afford quality, then the competing systems have to accelerate and improve their offerings in order to again niainta in their 1)OsitiOll. I am not one who thinks that the public school system is iii such desperate shape that it can't continue to attract on the basis of quality students in competition with other ssenis. To take~ your theory and your hypothesis, let us suppose we have a classroom of 30 children in which, well, everything is in a classroom with equality and the 10 most motivated parents deci(le to remove 10 of the children and put them in a competing system. Well, two things can happen. One the children left behind will continue to experieIlCe lack of quality or it is just possible that seeing the 10 children are leaving, the teacher, the superintendent, and the principal will work together to install and to assist in every degree possible in giving a better education to the 20 who are left. That is the way the competitive system has worked in my experi- ence. \Vhen you lose a customer you start improving your quality. At the. same time I would not look at this as a one way street. If there is a superior education in a. competing system I would expect in return for the recognition that the. parent has a right to hope for that and get the same quality and the same parameters would be introduced into the public system and there would be a cross over in both ways. What. I am referring to here again is not a subsidy where every parent reagrdless of means has the opportunity to move in and have his children subsidized in any school of his choice. I am suggesting only in this regard where we have disadvantaged p~ii'ents who are a burden in the sense that they do not have the means to do any of the. things necessary to maintain a family unit, and that is get a. better home, get adequate housing, adequate transportation to jobs. adequate benefits, socioeconomic benefits, and iiiost important education that we recognize that education is the No. 1 rout.e of the dilemma. In this regard the tuition or the assistance payment would go to the family so that it would come into the quality school program not as much-nor. as an admitte from the poorfaim, one who is coming in with the stigma of a disadvantaged child. The family w-ould bring with it an input into the quality of that system which would be a gain and the children would be accepted on the basis as all other children in the system so there would he no disparity. Again I would go back to my same point. Competition would be certainly better than what we have now which would be merely a myriad in which poorer quality would be replaced by poorer quality as the middle denominator moves down. At this sign of hope, no sign of rescue for these children should be abandoned. I would point to the distinguished panel that is gathered by the task force on education and by all of the people in the chamber of com- merce. I certainly want to associate my overall socioeconomic views with this. PAGENO="0780" 1602 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY ED~JCATION AMENDMENTS They came up with this idea of what is needed to arrest this declin- in~r in the system and that is a heavy dose of the elixer of competition. It seems everyone would benefit given the alternative. Mr. BtTRTON. I concur with most of the facts stated by our distin- guished chairman. I am not certain the solutions he has suggested would work. I have been pleased with the Elementary and Secondary Llinatioii At. It hns ovel(olne a lot of false barriers. It has im- proved the education of our Nation's youth. I would like some demonstration project if it is not already in the works. ~o that we can see, given the understanding that a demonstra- tion J)rOlect is subiect to overriding factors if this works. I am quite convinced that this business of permitting people to opt out permits of a possibility of adverse selection, this is a common usage in the insurance business. It is one of the reasons why social insurance doesn't permit opting. You are not permitted ad- verse selection because adverse selection per se both helps and hmders, dependent on which side of this line you happen to be on. I just don't know what the answer is for our Nation's education. I think the competitive factors are very useful. We learned this some- tune ago in time higher o(llleOtion held. I am not sure what we should do in the elementary field but~ I think demonstration projects would improve our understanding. Have we had any such demonstrations? Mr. Cuuiy. To the best of my knowledge there have never been any. Mr. BURToN. I think it would he a worthwhile thing to do. Mr. CAREY. It would have to be set up on a sound educational basis. I would agree with my colleague that it would have to be done on a research and limited scale first. Taking the technicality of the objec- tion and the real objection that the motivated people move out and leave the least motivated behind. Here again there is a way to control this and that would be to answer to a fair criticism that has been leveled at the public system. It has been suggested, and I think with some foundation, this nonpublic system by need of funding itself takes only the elite and it dumps the slow learner on the public system. There is not any question but that this has taken place. It was an accusation fairly directed at the public service and I think the public service to its credit did recognize it had this deficiency and tried to do more to maintain the slow learn- ing pupil in the system regardless of his capacity for achievement. I would see if this is going to be a true demonstration program in which there would be some democracy of selection, not just those that left the motivation would move out to the exceptional programs. There would have to be some average method of selecting. It is the slow learner who would have an opportunity to opt for the different system because the quality education has demonstrated you can't let the deficiencies of the public system go on to better units. I would rather see the child who is almost at the point of becoming a potential dropout be given the benefit of opting out of the system to see if the other system could help that particular child so it would have to be some methodical method of giving selection first to the slow learner. That would really set up true competition. PAGENO="0781" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDtCATION AMENDMENTS 1603 Mr. BURTON. If I may just conclude this colloquy with an observa- tion that I am sure bot.h my colleague and I recognize, that we are attempting to deal with one of the very important aspects of being poor in this country in a very selective and partial manner. I am sure my colleague and I would prefer that we find some solution for income maintenance for the poor generally so we would not be subject to dealing with one of the symptoms of poverty in this particular manner, although all too often we have to deal with it in the particular because you ean~t tinci, national general solution to the pi~o1ilem of personal or family poverty. I would prefer we conie to grips with this matter across the board. I suspect it will be years before we can do this in any meaningful way so we are probably stuck with the fact that we will have to look for sonic piece-by-piece solutions to the problems that poor people are confronted within this particular one field of education. Mr. CAREY. I would like the witness to make any final statements at this time. Mr. LIBAssI. I would just waiit to add there is very substantial evidence now that when Negro children are assigned to schools in which they are in the minority, whether it is a private school or a public school, that their educational achievement improves immeas- urably and that it is a significant contributing factor to equal educa- tional opportunity and also, as Mrs. Martin keeps reminding me, white children do not suffer educationally when a minority of Negro children are moved into the district. There is no measurable or appreciable diminution of their educa- tional achievement when they are in the majority and here there is a minority of Negro students in the school. Mr. CAREY. I wish the distinguished witnesses here this morning would be just as expeditious as possible in rendering to the committee the statement of facts and the statistics that we requested, which I think are most important to us in our deliberations on this bill and on the economic education. The Economic Opportunity Act when it comes up for discussion, because I think it is more important in all our discussions on the de- liberations, that we look at the significance it is going to have in the field of equal educational opportunities and that we do nothing to impair the very modest progress we have been able to make and again make ever greater progress in this regard. You can help us a great deal if you can get for us the matters we have addressed to you so we can enter them at the appropriate place in the record and we can use them in dealing with this legislation. Mr. BTTRTON. Do I take it that the Chair and I are in agreement be- cause Headstart under the war on poverty is providing us with one mechanism-the additional mechanism just how we might better im- prove educational quality for all of the Nation's youngsters and it would be premature to eliminate this mechanism from the variety of tools that we are seeking to the end that the educational quality of our youngsters is improved. That to transfer Headstart over directly to an Office of Education function through State agencies and with all of the alterations that might or might not entail might be quite ill advised at this time. PAGENO="0782" 1604 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Mr. CAREY. I don't agree with my colleague but I would point out those school systems which are truly interested now in educating the disadvantaged child, these districts have every opportunity that they can now possibly desire in terms of instituting integrated preschool programs under title L of ESEA. The only answer to application of the programs in areas where the school district does not intend to provide this kind of quality of in- tegrated education from the first day a child has learning experience, the only answer to that presently would be OEO Headstart programs which is the option outside the public school district program. I hope we would not shut off that avenue of option. That is the importance of our discussion. Chairman PERKINS. This concludes the hearings. The record will remain open through next week for the insertion of any pertinent data requested in the. record. (Whereupon, at 11:40 a.m., the committee adjourned subject to call of the Chair.) (TJS() memo appears on p.456.) DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE, OFFIcE OF EDUCATION, Washington.. D.C.. March 15,1967. Hon. J0IIN BRADEMAS. House of Representatives, TVc.shinpton., D.C. DEAR MR. BRADEMAS: The November 9. 1968 memorandum was written at the request of Dr. Edgar Fuller just prior to a meeting of Chief State School Officers to encourage State departments of education to take an active supervisory role in stimulating the development of imaginative Title III project applications. This development role by State departments of education has been advocated by the Office of Education since the inception of Title III as a major area for State contribution in the operation of the program as a Federal-State-local partnership. State departments of education have reacted in a number of ways to Title III of ESEA during the first year of operation. Some have accepted leadership re- sponsibility and have used ESEA Title V funds and State funds for employing (lie oi' more full-time coordinators for Title III. Over two-thirds of the States, however, have assigned a person to work only part-time with Title III. and have not exercised much of a leadership role. In general, better proposals are submitted from districts within States where the State departments of education have played an active role in the develop- meat of project applications. This has led the Office of Education to encourage all States to take an active role in developing imaginative project applications desi~ned to solve the major education problems of areas within the State. The importance of developing projects to meet local and area needs in terms of Na- tional concerns cannot be overstressed. The memorandum of November 9 merely suggeste(l several alternatives for State strategies as vital to a more effective National effort, but did not infer that nil State agencies independently would be able to fulfill the National aims of ESEA Title III without direct Federal adniin- istrative participation. The State and Federal educational agencies each have unique hut interdepend- ent roles in the successful implementation of Title III. Strengthening the capa- bilities of one agency should not imply the elimination of the other. office of Erluation administration. State department of education development, and local district operation of ESEA Title III projects involve new working relationships. At present. these relationships appear to be viable and hold promise for building upon the strengths of each of the components of this unique partnership. Sincerely yours, NOLAN ESTES. Associate Com nI1SSWJI er for Elem en tari~ an 1 ~eeon~7aii~ Fidvea f ion.. PAGENO="0783" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLCAT1ON AMENDMENTS 1605 (The followiug material was submitted by Mr. Libassi :) DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDFCATION, AND WELFARE, Des/i w1jton, I) .C. Hon. CARL PERKINS, Chairman, House Education and Labor Comniittee, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAJI MR. CHAIRMAN: When representatives of t.he Department appeared be- fore your Committee on March 18th and 20th, there were several requests from members of the Committee for additional information. Enclosed you will find a brown folder which is a "kit" of the principal docu- ments relating to the enforcement of Title VI with respect to school desegrega- tion. Included in the kit is the testimony by Commissioner Howe before other Congressional Committees, pertinent court (lecisiolls. iiienioranda prepared by Commissioner Howe to Chief State School Officers on this issue, and HEW and Department of Justice legal memoranda and pronouncements on the legality of the guideline requirements for school desegregation. Also included are specific items requested by the Committee: 1. List of complaints from September 1st through March 22nd, as requested by Congressman Steiger. 2. The request for information on the extent of desegregation for pre. school programs funded under Title I as compared to Headstart programs funded by the Office of Economic Opportunity. As you know, the Office of Education must rely on State Education Agencies for information on Title I programs and these latter agencies do not keep the kind of records that would provide us with the information requested by the Committee. how- ever. I have included a memo from Mr. Louis J. MeGuinness to Miss Carol Herzman, both of the Office of Education Title I ESEA Section which does list, by State, the number of preschool programs conducted with Title I funds; however, no indication of the extent of desegregation is available. We have asked the Office of Economic Opportunity for a list of Headstart programs and an indication of the extent to which these programs are ile- segregated, if that information is available. 3. The Committee asked for studies on the impact of desegregation on education generally. As we indicated when we were before the Committee, few studies have been made in this area. I am, however, passing on to the Committee the recent Commission on Civil Rights report on Racial Isolation and the Title IV report on Equality of Educational Opportunity, prepared 1)y the Office of Education. which might be helpful. 4. Information on the amount of funds available for the administration of Title VI for school desegregation: and. the number of professioiial staff members assigned in this area. Memo covering this iteni is included. 5. Statistics showing the number of white children in the public schools by State. The Statistical Summary for 1966-OT prepared by the Southern Education Reporting Service is the best source for this information, a copy is included. The Committee expressed interest in hearing about school districts that have taken steps to comply with the desegregation requirements of Title VT. I have enclosed some brief summaries of districts that have moved effectively in this area. You will note that they are labeled "success stories". If there are other items of specific information that will he helpful to the Committee. we will be happy to make every effort to obtain it. Sincerely, F. PETER LTrL~ssr. ~Specia7 Assistant to the ~`~eeretar~i for Ciril Ri1ht.~. ESTIMATED PERCENTAGE OF NONwHITES (OR NEGROES) AND WHITES (OR OTTIERS ENROLLED IN PUBlIC Scnooi.s. BY KINDERGARTEN. ELEMENTARY. AND SECONDARY LEVEL. IN 21 LARGE CITIES: 1960 AND CURRENTI.Y The estimates in the table attached are selected to display the comparison be- tween the 1960 and the current situation in large cities with respect to the pro- poi'tion of the nonwhite aiid w-hite pupils enrolled in public schouls. T)ata are PAGENO="0784" 1606 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTCATION AMENDMENTS confined to public schools because it is a fixed policy of the largest group of the nonpublic s'hools not to identify pupils by color or race with the result that statistics are not available. The data presented have been chosen because they serve to outline the comparison hetween the 1960 and the current situation. These estimotes are the responsibility of the Office of Education. They do not represent actual counts or hard data from a mailed questionnaire survey, but they are calculated from data and are much better than outright guesses. The 1960 data were taken from ES. Census reports and represent nonwhites ana whites in every case. The current estimates are based on statistical information secured at dill erent times. hut in no case are the data older than 1963. The current data variously represent nonwhites and whites, or Negroes and ~tliei'5. The comparisons between lOGo and the current situation are between the hreakdw-i~ currently availah~e. whatever it is. and nonwhites-whites (which is the only breakdown available froni the 1960 Census). Whenever possible separate estimates have been made for the kindergarten, elementary (grades 1-8), and se'onclarv grades 9-12o levels, the breakdown which is available from the 1960 (`en'.Ils. The group variously named Mexican Americans, Spanish Americans, Latin Americans. or Puerto Ricans is included with the white group because of Census pl'a(tiee and regardless of the fact that they are frequently a severely disad- vantaged group. Enrollment in vocational schools is incorporated at the appropriate grade. Enrollment in special schools is incorporated at the appropriate grade when it ~va~ know-u to the investuizatir : otherwise it was disregarded. In general, the principal problem, and the most likely source of error in the estimates. was that of taking the distribution by color in grades 7, 8, and 9 in junior hirh schools and allocating it to grades 1-S and 9-12, which is the 1960 Census pattern. The figure in column 6 is the nonwhite gain in percentage points. The figure in r'oluinin 7 represents the same nonwhite gain expressed as a percentage of the 1960 base firure. which is itself a percentage. The comparison of the current sil in: tin with the 1960 situation is a mixture of two principal elements. One is the over-all gain in population in large cities, which in turn is reflected in school enrollment. The other is the relative gain of nonwhites as an element in the population compared to the whites. By reducing the basic enrollment data for the two groups to percentages, or proportions of the whole, the influence of over-all gaiui in big city population is eliminated. The figure in column 7, then, represents the relative gain of nonwhites relative to whites and apart from the over-all gain of both groups. The average, or mean, of the nonwhite gains expressed as percentages of the 1960 base percentages is 27.3 at the kindergarten level. 27.9 at the elementary level, and 29.0 at the secondary level. These are means of percentages and in order to be interpreted meaningfully each percentage must be accorded a separate status a~ a statistic by the reader. They indicate that the gain in the proportion of nonwhites in the 21 large cities is slightly more than one-quarter of the original 1960) proportion, considering each city as a unit of interest equal to that of any other city. If another six years produces a like gain, the gain over the twelve years will he over ~ A gain of i0~~ applied to an original proportion as low as one-third would project a city more than half nonwhite as respects school enrollment. A w-orcl of caution: It is difficult to compare these percentages with each other and bear in mind all of the c'onsiderations that affect the comparison. The fact that the secondary level gain is larger than the elementary level gain does not, for example, ulmean that the difference in absolute number of nonwhites in see- ondai'y schools now as against 1960 is greater than the difference in absolute number of nonwhites in elementary schools now as against 1960. PAGENO="0785" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTCATION AMENDMENTS 1607 Estimated percentage of nonwhites (or Negroes) and whites (or others) enrolled in public schools, by kindergarten, elementary, and secondary level, in 21 large cities. 1960 and currently 1960 Currently Nonwhite gain City In Asa Nonwhite White Nonwhite White percentage percent (Negro) (other) points increase from 1960 (iF (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Baltimore: Kindergarten 53 47 62 38 9 17 Elementary 53 47 b4 36 F 11 21 ~econdary 41 is 53 47 12 29 Total 50 F 6t 39 11 22 Boston: F Kindergarten 15 85 30 F 70 15 100 Elementary 18 82 28 72 10 55 secondary K 89 is 82 7 63 Total ___ Bnliato: Kindergarten 28 72 36 F 64 8 29 Elementary 28 72 35 65 7 25 secondary 16 84 23 F F7 44 Tol~ 25~'3 32~b8~7~ 28 Chicago: I I Kindergarten 40 60 56 F 44 16 40 Elementary 44 56 56 44 12 27 secondary 29 71 42 58 13 45 Total 4c 60 52 48 12 30 Cincinnati Kjtdergartcn 30 70 42 58 12 40 Elententary F 66 41 59 : 7 21 ~econdary 31 69 36 64 5 16 Total 67 4~21 Cleveland: - - Kindergarten 42 58 54 46 12 Elementary 53 K 47 6 13 secondary 64 38 Total 45 55 50 50 5 Dallas: ~indergarte (1) (I) (F) (F) (l( (1) Elementary 22 78 25 75 i 3 14 secondary 82 79 3 17 Total 14 Detroit: Kindergarten 56 F 43 13 30 Elementary 46 57 43 11 24 secondary __-_-~_ 65 49 K 14 40 Total ____ 43~57K ______ 12 28 Houston: kindergarten 24 76 32 68 8 33 Elementary 27 73 37 63 10 37 secondary 241 76 25 75~ 1 4 Total 26~ 74 34 66 8 31 Los Angeles: F F kindergarten 21 79 23 77 2 10 ~lementary 21 7~ : 2 10 secondary `9F ~ is 85 ~4 -21 Total ~2t! 79 2l~79F0 0 75_492-67-Pt. 2-50 PAGENO="0786" 1608 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Estimated percentage of non-jr/mites (or Negroes) and whites (or others) enrolled in public se/tools, by kindergarten, elementary, and secondary level, in 21 large -_cities. 1.960 and eurrently-C'ontinued 1960 Currently Nonwhite gain City In As a Nonwhite White Nonwhite White percentage percent (Negro) (other) points increase from 1960 (2! (4) (55 (6) (7) Milwaukee: Kindergarten 18 82 26 74 8 44 Elementary 18 82 25 75 7 39 Secondary H 89 18 82 7 64 Total ___ ____ ___ 7 44 New Orleans: Kindergarten .55 42 50 41 4 7 Elementary .Ss 42 66 34 8 14 Sennidary 47 ! 53 53 47 6 13 Total 55 45 J 63 37 8 15 New York: Kindergarten ! 22 78 27 73 5 23 Elementary 24 76 32 68 8 33 Secondary 17 83 ! 21 79 4 24 Total 22 78 27 73 5 23 Phita lelpisia: Kindergarten 40 60 44 ! 56 4 10 Elementary *~0 .50 60 40 10 20 Secosslary 39 61 50 50 11 28 Tot:d 47 53 56 44 9 19 Pittsburgh: Kitsdrgarten 27 ! 73 39 61 12 44 F.lententary 36 64 39 61 3 8 Secondary 25 75 31 69 6 24 Total 32 68 37 63 5 16 St. Louis: Kindergarten 47 F 53 ! 57 43 10 21 Elementary 51 49 64 36 13 25 Secondary 5 50 oO 16 Total 49 50 60 40 it 22 San Atstotsio: Kisidergartets 51) ci) (1) (1) (1) (1) Elementary 5 92 14 86 6 75 Setondary - 5 ! 92 11 89 3 38 Total 5 ! 92 13 87 5 63 San Diego: Kindergarten : 14 86 3 27 Elementary 10 90 14 86 4 40 Seentolary - 91 2 22 Totd tO 90 13 87 3 30 San Francisco: Kindergarten 32 68 41 59 9 28 Elementary 36 64 ! 9 25 Secondary 25 75 - 43 57 18 ! 72 Tot:d 33 7~UW~ 30 Seattle: Kindernarten 13 1 83 4 31 Elesnenl:try It s9 : 16 84 45 Seeomlary 8 92 12 88 4 Tnt:d H ~ 36 Washingtnn, l).C.: ! - -~ - Kinlern:srten 0) 20 ! ! Etenentary ot 20 9t 9 : 11 t4 Secondary 69 31 89 11 20 16 Tnt:d~ 78 22 90 10 12 F 15 1 Not available. PAGENO="0787" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1609 Estimated fall enroilnicut in 5th grade conipared. wit/i lug/i school graduates 8 1/ears later: United ~`States, 1948-56 to 19u; -7? [In millions of pupilsi 5th grade Iligh school enrollment 1 School year graduates ~ ! ~ 1 2 Droupouts,2 5th grade to high school graduation (column 2 minus column 4) 5 Fall of- 1948 2.4 1995-56 1.4 1949 1 2.4 1955-57 1.4 1950 2.5 1957-58 1.5 1951 2.7 1958-59 i 1.6 1952 I 2.9 1959-60 1.9 1953 Fo 1960-61 2.0 1954 2.9 1961-62 1.9 1955 2.9 1962-63 20 1951Y 3.3 1963-64 2.3 19a 1964-65 2.6 1958 3.6 1965-66 12.6 1959 3j~ 1965-67 12.6 1961) 3.6 1967-63 437 1961 3.7 I 1963-69 1962 3.9 1969-70 12.9 1963 3.9 1970-71 ~30 1964 4.0 1971-72 ~3.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 .9 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 ,9 ,9 1.0 .9 .18 1 Compulsory attendance laws keep virtually all children in school at least until the 5th grade. 2 These Office of Education estimates do not allow for persons who receive high school equivalency certif- icates nor for persons who leave tile regular school system before graduation to enter trade, business, and vocational schools amId who may consider themselves to be high schojol graduates. l'Imo estimate d nuniber of persons in these categories is approximately 200,000 a year. ~ Eel iniated. Projected by Otlice of Education. NoTE-Includes public and nonpublic schools in the 50 States and District of Columbia. "SUCCESS STORIES" (BRIEF SUMMARIES OF DISTRICTS THAT HAVE MOVED EFFECTIVELY IN THE AREA OF S('HOOL DESEGREGATION) Districts Making Progress After Visit Buckinghant. County-This district had 1% pupil desegregation indicated in its April 1966 estimates with a faculty index of .14. Both pupil and faculty Statistics w'ere far less than the equivalent of 1 faculty member per School which our guides suggested and the pupil desegregation guides set forth in the guide- lines. Thereafter, tile district reopened a choice period, moving from 16 children to 154 children, that is, from 1% to 10.6% desegregation. It also achieved a 1.1% faculty index. (`itt, of ]Iartin,srtilc.-The April 1966 statistics revealed that tills district anticipated that 0111%- 47 children would attend desegrega ted schools or 2.8% pupil desegi'egation. There was to be .62 faculty tiesegregation. As a result of (lilt' visit, a reopened choice perioti, conuniusiity meetings participated in by both time School Superintendent anti the Chairman of the School Board, tile number of cllii(lren attending desegregated schi `ols increased to 7$ or 4.4% lJul)il (Ic- segregation as well as to 1.55 faculty desegregation. (`he.sapealce Public AS'c/tools.-The district anticipated 5.5% desegregation or 416 children desegregated and it went to 7.3% or 519 children desegregated and moved from .31 faculty to .96 faculty desegregation in 35 schools after our visit. Clarke County-had an April 1966 estimate of 63% pupil desegregation and a~ a result of our visit was able to complete the (lesegl'egation process including full desegregation of its faculty. N. B.-Ilarry Fioud 1-lvrd, Sm's Imoml'. `l'lic district is now being processed for HEW 441 status. Louis-a Countu.-was at 7.3% desegregation according to April 1966 statistics with .16 index in faculty. As a result of our visit they went to 11.tlc~ puitli desegregation. that is. from 114 to 206 pupils and to .50 faculty dcscgrcgation_ PAGENO="0788" 1610 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS ARKAN SAS The Searcy Independent School District, approximately 50 miles North of Little Rock, has achieved complete desegregatoin. The school system has ab- sorbed all its 168 Negro students into schools attended by 2,000 white students. In the 196o-06 school year, Searcy had less than a third of its Negro students in school on a desegregated basis. In the 1964-05 school year, Searcy was fully segregated Superb ten (lent. James TV. Ah if. The Jonesboro Independent School District has desegregated 64 percent of the Negro students in the current school year, up from 6.7 percent the previous year, involving some massive changes in historical enrollment patterns. Super- intendent, C. H. Gels. GEORGIA On August 29, 1966, the Baker County School District was notified that a Federal hearing examiner had recommended termination of its Federal assistance because of racial discrimination. The school administration then moved to admit 59 Negro students into predominantly w-hite schools, immediately creating serious tension in the white and Negro communities. The Atlanta Daily World published a news article on October 6, 1966, which state(l that Negro parents were threatening to boycott all Baker County Schools "if nothing is done to halt harassment and inequities directed at Negro students." The article said the sheriff had done nothing about white youth who pointed pistols at Negro students. Several Negro students said they had been attacked at school, and subjected to insults by teachers, principals, and bus drivers. ()n November 1. the Baker County Board of Education passed a forcefully- worded resolution which was distributed to all students, teachers, and school staff, and which brought an end to much of the mistreatment. Three weeks later the Federal assistance w-as restored for Baker County. The positive and ~vel1-publicized commitment of the school board to desegregation is credited by EEOP staff for the relative success accomplished in Baker in the face of firee community opposition. Superintendent, H. B. Hall. lii Floyd county. Ga.. tile school district abandoned a freedom of choice plan in favor of geographic zoning, and full desegregated its student body. This year, the Floyd County schools have 618 Negro students in formerly all white schools, ending a harsh discriminatory system that had involved transportation of almost all of the Negro children in the county system to Negro schools in Rome, Ga. In addition, Floyd County made a better beginning in faculty de- segregation than many other Georgia districts, Superintendent, H. A. Lindsey. FLORIDA Okeechobee County is a rural area which had operated a dual school system prior to the 1965-1966 school year. The usual dire predictions of racial violence preceded efforts of the school district to desegregate successfully under a freedom of choice plan. At the beginning of the 1965-66 school year, all but about eight Negro high school students elected to enter the white high school. As a result, the former Negro high school was closed and all students assigned to other schools. Okeechobee is perhaps most noteworthy because freedom of choice worked. After it desegregated, the community went about its business in relative peace. The school system this year is almost fully desegregated. Superintendent, Carl T. Durrence. Usceola County. Fla.. moved from 21.3 percent desegregation of its Negro stu- dents in 1965-66 to 60 percent in the current school year. About 640 of the 4300 students in Osceola are Negro. Superintendent, William B. Stephens. Hanatee County, Fla., provides an excellent example of success under capable school leadership. Manatee has enrolled 580 of its 3800 Negro students in school with white children (approximately 15 percent). Partly responsible for Mana- tee's progress is a newsletter issued by the school superintendent, which said: "We believe we are dealing with more than the force of the Federal govern- nient. We are facing the consciences of a public which increasingly believes that the racial injustices of the past century must at long last be corrected. The pres- sures of the times-not the rioting on the streets. hut the convictions of decent and PAGENO="0789" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTCATION AMENDMENTS 1611 thoughtful people across the country-demand that we no longer maintain a first and second class of citizenship." The newsletter, issued February 1, 1967, is signed by J. Hartley Blackburn, I(anatee superintendent. (See copy of front page, attached). In addition to student desegregation, Manatee has assigned 25 fuiltime teachers `across racial lines." NORTH CAROLINA Moore County, N.C., attributes part of its success in desegregation to a project funded by Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 196-I, preparing school personnel for problems growing out of desegregation. The school system has desegregated 62.5 percent of its Negro students. Thirteen of its 15 schools are desegregated, and 16 Negro teachers are in schools attended predominantly by white students. Superintendent, R. E. Lee. Cabarrus County, N.C., with a total of 9,200 students, has assigned all its 1100 Negro students to school on a desegregated basis by switching from freedom of choice plan to geographic attendance areas. Cabarrus, which had achieved 18.5 percent desegregation of its schools under freedom of choice in 1965-66, no longer has an all-Negro school. In addition, desegregated faculty and bus transporta- tion. The county formerly bussed Negro to a city school while white students attended school in their neighborhood. Superintendent, J. 31. Robinson. TEXAS Sherman Independent School District, said to be the locale of the last Negro lynching in Texas 30 years ago, is in the Eastern part of the State with the same population makeup that is found in Northern Louisiana. The school district has 710 Negro students, 5,918 white students. It has enrolled 549 Negro students in schools on a desegregated 1)aSis. In addition, considerable progress is being ac(-omphshed in other East Texas areas-Paris and Tyler among them. Super- intend~nt. Byro?? Doris. Excellent source and contact to open doors in the area is (`. P. ((`ap) Landolt, former Sherman school superintendent who is now a regional compliance officer for Equal Educational Opportunities Program. Landolt is in the Dallas regional office. VIRGINIA Amherst County exemplifies a rural county's dual-personality approach to end- ing the dual school system. The school district has approximately 5100 students, of which about one-third are Negro. Some 10 percent of the Negro students are now in formerly w-hite schools, largely because of leadership of the school superintendent, Tyler Fulcher. While the school district is making progress in desegregation, it is also the locale of a newly-established private school which serves as an escape hatch for white students running from segregation. (See clipping of neus story by Peter A. Jans~en of Nc~rhovse iVeir.cpapers). EXAMPLES OF PROGRESS IN SCHOOL DESEGREGATION While most Federal efforts to accomplish school desegregation in the Southern States still meet with grudging acceptance or outright resistance, there have been numerous instances of realistic progress. Here are some examples: BORDER STATES Delaware and Kenutcky, two of the 17 States that once operated separate white and Negro schools as a matter of public policy, are nearing complete com- pliance with P.S. Office of Education Guidelines by the fall of 1966. A cooperative stance by State authorities in Kentucky will substantially eliminate the dual school system there in all but six school districts this fall. The remaining six districts have made good progress and are firmly committed to desegregation next year, with completion of school construction projects. PAGENO="0790" 1612 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS A school district in Paducah, which still had sixty percent of its Negro stu- dents in segregated schools last year, will have no schools identifiable by race this fall. All students in rural Trigg County will attend desegregated schools this fall. Last year more than sixty percent of the county's Negro students were in segregated schools. One fourth of the Trigg County population is Negro. Some faculty desegregation has taken place in all Kentucky districts, although more remains to be (lone in this area. The State has undertaken a number of projects at least partially financed by Federal funds to prepare its schools, teachers, and pupils for an effective desegregated education program. Tennessee A year-at-a-time desegregation plan in Kingsport, Tennessee, 11 years in the planning stage, was discarded before it was initiated this year. Instead, the school system built and (lesegregated a new high school. In addition, two junior high schools and an elementary school were desegregated. Seventeen of the 19 Negro teachers are assigned to biracial schools. The staff fouiid that although the Weakley schools had adopted a freedom of choice plan for student attendance. only one Negro child out of 400 had se- lected a white school. Itivestigation indicated that Negro parents had been discouraged by the superintendent of the Negro schools. u-ho believed his job to he in jeopardy. The Office of Education recomniefl(le(l closing of the Negro elementary schools. all of which were small and inadequate. The suggestion was accepted by school administrators and \Veakley schools will he fully desegregated in September. The elementary schools in Weakley County, Tennessee. in the vicinity of KKK activity. u-ill he totally desegregated this fall, partly as a result of a compliance review l)y the Office of Ethication staff members. TilE SOUTH Noticeahle gains have also been achieved in desegregation efforts in the Deep S ott th. Arka n sq .s The Plum Bayou school district P30 white and 230 Negro students) adopted a free choice enrollment plan that ~vill place half of the Negro students in formerly white schools this fall. The Beedeville school district, preparing to close its Negro school next year, will enroll three-foui'ths of its Negro students in formerly white schools this fall. The district hits (O() students, with almost a 50-50 ratio of white an(l Negro students. In the Lewisville school (listrict. a free choice enrollment plan this year resulted in only four of 42-1 Negro students choosing to attend white schools. Checking into complaints that Negro parents w-ere afraid of i'eprisals if they I)laced their children in white schools. Office of Education staff members assisted the school administration in working out a plan which will result in approximately 15 per- cent of the Negro students being desegregated. At least one Negro teacher will he assigned to each white school. Lewi~vihle is only 20 miles from the Louisiana border where school districts show little progress. Flori4a A number of Florida counties are progressing satisfactorily in efforts to comply with the Guidelines. In Dade County. 15.000 Negro students will attend classes with white students. Monroe County is desegregating all its schools. Gilehm'ist and Hardee (`ounties will enroll almost half of their Negro students in formerly while schools this year. Sixteen percent of the Negro students in Marion and Martin Counties will attend desegregated schools. Florida is the only state in the Deep South to our know-ledge in which the State superintendent has stated in public that the dual school systems must be eli niina ted. PAGENO="0791" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1613 South Carolina One school district in Chesterfield, South Carolina, has fully desegregated; another will enroll 22 percent of its Negro students in predominantly white schools. A district in Anderson County, despite great political pressure, is planning to assign two Negro teachers to each white school and two white teach- ers to each Negro school. Manatee County (Florida) White students, 12,200; Negro students. 3800 Manatee County has been cited by EEOP compliance staff and by the NAACP leader in Florida as a good exaiuple of progress. although statistically it has achieved only 15 percent desegregation-5S0 Negro students in school with whites. Manatee's distinguishing feature is a superintendent who iuakes speeches lo- cally and nationally for desegregation, relating it to improved education. The superintendent is a supporter of Title VI and beneficiary of Title IV. In fact, his district gets about $2 million a year in Federal funds for a variety of edu- cation programs. As a reward for his early progress nnder the guidelines, the superintendent lost three Democratic school board members in the recent election, large on the race issue, and his most recent effort to plan for further desegregation next year was rebuffed by the board. At issue: proposed closing of a ~~egro elementary school, Rubonia, and reassignment of the 70 students to predominantly white schools. At a meeting of the board, the plan was rejected by the Negro faculty and parents, as well as by some outspoken white citizens and the new- board members. Manatee County's days ns an example of progress are numbered, al- though it ~vould still be worthwhile to get the superintendent on film with his Views. An elected official himself, the superintendent-J. IJartley Blackburn- fully expects to be defeated when he faces the voters again in about 22 months. He has been in office 22 years. The school w-hich is the center of the current flap in Manatee is a run-down frame building in a little s.hanty town several miles from the bigger and better downtown schools (in Bradeilton) . The principal is a Negi'o woman w-ho has opposed faculty desegregation in her school on the rather tenuous grounds that "We aren't good enough yet. Give us a year." The school system has 25 teach- ers in desegregated situations. With all its apparent drawbacks, Mnnatee County is worth a visit for a chance to get the superintendent on film, for his advocacy of desegregation in the face of tierce local opposition, iucluding front-page editorials blasting all the major decisions that he has made. Some Negro guidance counselors in the Manatee school systenì, operating as part of a Title IV project, (-0111(1 talk authoritatively aloiut what happens to Negro children going into a desegregated situation for the first time. Joiosboro, Arkansas (Craig/i cad County) White students. 4522 : Negro students, 529. Jonesboro School District has admitted tw-o-thirds of its Negro student enroll- nment to formerly white schools, moving from 6 percent a year ago to about 63 percent this year. The school system has an all-Negro school, grades 1-8, which it expects to close in the coming school year to complete desegregation. Like most other school districts iii this part of the country. .Joneshoro is struggliu~ over a plan to salvage the Negro school facility which apparently is a good building. The probable solution w-ill be to turn it into a vocational school for white and Negro students, and give it a new name. Present name, Booker T. Washington. Superintendent C. H. Gels and his board cliairnman. .James Lalley. feel they have had excellent commnnity support for their administrative decisions. The hoard chairman is a young (mid-thirties) executive for a local General Electric plant, which he says is also desegregating. The school system has thr~ teachers "across racial hues," one for each school, and apparently plans no major change in its policy regarding faculty. PAGENO="0792" 1614 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS Jonesboro is a rather unexciting example of progress. The school district is in the Northeastern part of the State and well ahead of the State average in desegregation. The officials are willing but not eager to take part in a docu- mentary. In the presence of his board chairman, the superintendent contributed little of interest during the interview. He provided no leads on community or faculty people who might be helpful in putting together a documentary picture. The key figure in Jonesboro is the board chairman, Lalley, who could be quite helpful with a little encouragement from a TV network or the State education agency. Searcy Sc/tool District, Arkansas (Wit ite Co en ty) White students, 2,331; Negro students, 168. Searcy School District adopted a freedom of choice plan for the 1965-66 school year, ceased providing education for some 40 to 50 Negro children from neighboring districts, and proceeded to desegregate its own. What formerly served as a Negro school for all grades from 1-12 has been converted into a desegregated elementary school with more white students than Negroes. With only a small percentage of Negro students, Searcy does not con- sider desegregation a major problem nor has it been one. The community has quietly accepted the changes proposed by the school administration. One factor in the community support was the favorable attitude of the Searcy Daily Citi- zen, which has backed the school board in its decisions. The editor, Perrin Jones, is said to be progressive in his attitude toward desegregation and influ- ential in State education policy. School Superintendent James W. Ahlf says that all actions leading to de- segregation were carefully and thoroughly explained to community leaders, including the P-TA, Chamber of Commerce, and other civic organizations. Searcy is about i0 miles North of Little Rock, the biggest trade center for miles around. The school district has at least one Negro teacher in all its schools. Its only difficulty in the beginning was that it dropped half-a-dozen Negro teachers whose salaries had been paid by neighboring districts w-ho sent their Negro children to Searcy. For this, the school district was investigated by the FBI but noth- ing came of it. Ahif is aware of his vulnerability on faculty desegregation but believes the issue is dead. His district has moved from 441-B to 441 status this year. Guy Perkins Sc/too! District. 4rkan.sas (Faulkner County) White students, 167; Negro students, 117. The residents of this small rural school district voted, iii effect, to desegre- gate. The vote came about because Superintendent I. H. Fielder proposed to close the Negro elementary school and absorb all the students in the compre- hensive school system that has already desegregated at the high school level. A new- wing was needed on the white elementary school. The residents voted for the increased tax knowing that the purpose was to achieve complete de- segregation. The vote: 93 to 26. Superintendent Fielder has arranged for testing of all his students by a near- by college and expects to know within a few days where each stands. He is certain that the Negro children are behind white children of the same age at least two or three years and hopes to use the specific test information to gear his curriculum to the change. The superintendent is a dairyman who presides over his red-dust domain in a khaki shirt and trousers. Among the possibilities for camera coverage is a breakfast program con- ducted for about 60 Negro elementary students under Title I. ESEA. The superintendent says all the children in his district are from poor fam- ilies. Fle is quite willing, in fact anxious, to participate in the proposed TV PAGENO="0793" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1615 docunsentary. One reason: the white children and parents in his district have been the target of jibes from neighboring communities because of their progress in desegregation and he obviously would like to see the school districts that are making progress get some recognition for it. It would be difficult to find a better example of rural South than the Guy Perkins district. The superintendent is confident that his white and Negro teachers could handle themselves on national television. Okccchobee County, Florida White students. 2,100: Negro students. $00. Superintendent Carl Durrance says Okeechobee County has 41 percent of its Negro children in school with white children. The school district plans to assign white and Negro children to all its five school buildings next year, but will not achieve 100 percent desegregation. A group of grades will be assigned to each of the schools, including what is now the Negro elementary school. The Negro high school was closed last year. However, Okeechobee is consider- ing allowing Negro children in the neighborhood of the present Negro elementary school a free choice for grades one, two, and three. Consequently some chil- dren in these grades will still be in school with students only of their own race, although white children at another grade level will be attending the same school on a desegregated basis. This dual use of what is presently the Negro ele- nientary school will prevent 100 percent desegregation by class, and is typical of the flaws in most of the plans examined as possible "success stories." Even so. Okeechobee is ahead of other school districts in Florida on a percentage basis, has exceeded guidelines minimum requirements, and has effected some desegregation `with little or no difficulty. Okeechobee is using a Title IV consultant on desegregation, from the Florida Atlantic University. It has met miniiaum standards on faculty desegregaton, about one teacher per school. Twenty years ago, Okeechobee was still arguing over whether to educate its Seminole children-and some from neighboring counties-but now the com- munity has accepted the Negro students without a ruffle. State Total school districts having en- rollmsnt of 1,200 or more students School districts responding to survey School districts reporting summer programs serving prekinder- garten children School districts reporting summer programs serving kindergarten children Alabama Arkansas Florida Georgia Kentucky Louisiana Mississippi North Carolina Soulh Carolina Tennessee Texas Virginia West Virginia Total 113 9° 62 175 150 67 136 165 103 123 313 122 ~ 1,673 91 88 49 174 150 67 126 164 101 97 307 114 ~ 1,582 7 55 4 12 3 4 4 12 8 5 38 12 ~ 170 14 10 8 40 25 9 10 53 21 15 130 39 ~ 331 PAGENO="0794" (`OM PLAINTS Received - - A~vaiting investigation Being investigated Investigated and found invalid Found valid Illinois lndiaii;i Is~'~i Kiiiisas Reni inky 10 1 9 Lisi' ui' ( PM `IA! N'I'S E"It()M SEPT. 1 THROUffiI MAR. 22, BIBIKEN I)o%% N ii \` S i'~'i i~ `l'oial Alabama Alaska Arisona Arkaris:e, ( ``iliforin I `nlnr i ii si' p .aiNrs Ii `i'eivi'-l - 1-Il 79 I 25 1 A\%llj(i!lL'iiivl'Sij~l(ji)ll - S 3 lP'jIlLj!lvi'~ ti('llll'l 120 5 6 Ii ivp~tj~'~iji'l ad luinil dii ilid 30 1 I 7 l".iiiril iIj iso 62 )p (if Null';. `I oj::I ii i~ i'ollipl;ijiii fur n(lii'r Ii;uri jiublir i'li'riii'i(iry iiiil 5I'('oIiilary schools. (`oiupliiuts inrhicaleil bypp'rjsk. l'ot il Florida ti eorgia I lawaii Idaho (0511' I. -~ IN 15 lt~ieeiveil -- - 15 42 t~vntiiigiiivestigitinii - 2 `10 lli'iigiiivestjg;iii'iL - 3 10 ltivestigilialaielfouiuliivilil 3 7 U'()liIi(lVlili(l 7 15 * 1 college coinplai it--( eorgia Tech, Total Louisiana Maine Maryland `19 17 2 0 0 Massa- Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri chusetts 2 `51 1 1 1 2 2 48 - Montana `Louisiana-Private school complaint; Mississippi-Complaint under review in Catholic school. PAGENO="0795" Tot il COMPLAINTs Received .&\vaitiiigiIivestigatiO!i IleiiigiiivesiigAted~ - -- -- liivestigati3l aiid found invalid .Foniiii valid - Nebraska Nevada J{ew I laiopshire (`OM `TAINTs Iti'ceiveii - Awaiting investigation - - - - Being ilivcstigate(l Investigated and fiiiiiid invalid Feinid valid *North (`arolina-2 special schools. Total Oregon iii it FiAt NTS lIi'peive'd .. - Awaiting invest igalion Icing invi~stig:ited liivi'stig~iti'd iiiii foinid iivalid toiiiid vtiliil * IT nivi'rsit y of Tetinessee housing coiiiplaint and notiathletic scholarship for Negro athletes. New New New North North ( Boo Oklahoma Jersey Mexico York Carolina l)akotii -----~ -- -~---- r hi 2 - - - *1., - 0 0 10 7 2 1 ~-` hi 2 1 1 .5 2 .3 - hi H ~t- >1 rf. `l'ex;is ITt iti \`ernon it 0 - -- ~- - C ~ t.,i ,i~ ~iiii~~I - -- - -: ~- hi H 10 hi 17 r~ r) Rhode Sooth Sooth Island Carolina l)akot a l'entisyl- vania 3 3 Tennessee 25 15 3 2 5 * 14 12 Virginia Waslni igton 40 37 West Virginia 4 3 2 - \Vyon ii ig H C SI -i SI H U) [. PAGENO="0796" 1618 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS MEMORANDA FROM CoMMIssIoNna HOWE TO CHIEF STATE SCHOOL OFFICERS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE, OFFICE OF EDUCATION, Washington, D.C., April 15, 1966. MEMORANDUM To: Chief State School Officers. From: Harold Howe II, U.S. Commissioner of Education. Subject: Title VI Guidelines. Several chief State school officers have inquired about the approval of Ele- mentary and Secondary Education Act Title I projects for school districts which have not sul)mittecl 441-B compliance forms by April l~. This letter is your authorization to continue approvals under Title I until May U, at whkh tinie any cuuimitnieiit of new Federal funds will be subject to deferral. We shall take a similar position in regard to various programs for which we approve funds in this Office. We will be in further communication with you. This extension has been arranged to give school districts time to complete their compliance arrangements. I hope that it is helpful. Within the next few days we shall be notifying school districts in your State which have not filed the appropriate documents for compliance about the forms and information which are still necessary. In the meantime, I hope that you will encourage superintendents to proceed with compliance procedures as rapidly as possible. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE, OFFICE OF EDUCATION. Washiagton. D.C., May 5. 1966. BUREAU OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION To: Title I Coordinators. ESEA. From: John F. Hughes. Director, Division of Program Operations. Subject: Compliance with the Civil Rights Act with Respect to the Projects to be filed for Fiscal Year 1967 under Title I. As stated in the Revised Statement of Policies for School Desegration Plans under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. local educational agencies whose voluntary desegregation plans have been accepted by the Commissioner may continue their status as applicants in compliance by filing Form HEW 441-B. Grants based on project applications filed for 1967 may be approved for all applicants who have established compliance as soon as funds are available. Any subsequent action that the Commissioner may take, prior to the effective date of a final order, will not affect the continuation of a previously approved project. However, any review or investigation disclosing that the applicant may not be in compliance could, of course, result in a notification by the U.S. Commissioner of Education to defer any new commitments of funds which would otherwise be approved for an applicant under Title I. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE. OFFICE OF EDUCATION. Washington, D.C., Jvly 1, 1966. MEMORANDUM To: Chief State School Officers. From: Harold Howe II. U.S. Commissioner of Education. Subject: Responsibilities of State Education Agencies in Assuring Compliance for State Approved Projects. Recently a number of State departments of education have raised questions concerning their responsibility for assuring compliance with the nondiscrimina- tion requirements of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Several State systems have objected that their agencies are not enforcement agencies and have noresponsi- bility to assure that federally assisted programs funded through their agency are in compliance with the Act. PAGENO="0797" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDtrCATION AMENDMENTS 1619 I feel that it is most important that State agencies be reminded of their responsibilities in this area. The intent of Congress in enacting Title VI was that no further Federal assistance should be provided for programs in which there is discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin. Since, in many Federal education programs, the Congress has also presoribed that much of the educational leadership and administrative responsibility for the program shall be borne by the State departments of education, it is evident that State educational agencies have an important responsibility for carrying out the non- discrimination policies now written into all of these programs. Each State educational agency has filed with the Office of Education a State- ment of Compliance giving its assurance that it will fulfill these responsibilities as a condition for the receipt of Federal financial assistance through the Office of Education and outlining the methods of administration to be used by the State department of education in carrying them out. Each agency has set out, among other things, the methods it will use to "Review periodically the practices of the State agency, school districts, and other agencies participating in these programs, to ascertain and assure that these practices are in conformity with the Regulation and the Statement of Compliance." The instructions accom- panying the Statement of Compliance forms, issued December 19~4. stated that "While it is recognized that some discriminatory practices may occur in school districts and other agencies which are not within the control of the State agency, the methods of administration must describe the efforts that the State agency will make to effect compliance (such as advice and consultation), and must pro- vide that where such efforts fail, the U.S. Commissioner of Education will be so advised." Such methods must also provide for the evaluation of compliance, for taking timely action to correct discriminatory practices found to exist, and for keeping the Office of Education informed regarding the disposition of com- plaints. Failure of the States to carry out these responsibilities violates the intention of Congress to maintain the decentralization of educational responsibility in the States and local school districts. It invites Federal action where it may not be needed. It furthermore constitutes a violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act which could jeopardize the continued participation of the entire State in federally assisted programs. The recent examples which have given rise to these questions of State responsibility have come up under the summer programs financed through Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. My memorandum of April 25 called attention to the importance of State educational agencies reviewing summer projects to make sure that they would be operated on a nondiscrimina- tory basis. Some State departments of education have informed local school districts of the April 25 memorandum and have undertaken to review all projects to assure compliance. Others have not done so. We are now receiving com- plaints of segregated summer programs conducted in violation of Title VI. There is particular concern about those school districts which have purposely switched the funding of their summer preschool programs from the Office of Economic Opportunity to the Elementary and Secondary Act in the hope of avoiding the nondiscrimination requirement. We are now planning visits to some of these programs to review these charges. member to work with our staff in remedying any noncompliance. If we cannot I hope that if any such visit is required in your State you will assign a staff count upon State agency responsibility in this matter we will have to review the status of compliance of the State educational agency with its Statement of Compliance. I am sorry to say that we have heard of some instances in which local school districts have canceled their summer programs rather than comply with the nondiscrimination requirements. I hope that the strongest leadership can be exercised from the State level to prevent local school districts from taking such action. Already we have received strong pleas from local groups for the Federal Government to finance directly programs to hell) disadvantaged youngsters where local school authorities have abdicated their responsibility for using the avail- able funds for the purpose intended by the Congress. I am sure you feel that direct Federal funding or operation of such programs is not desired by most people, but you should recognize that failure of local school districts to take responsible action will certainly increase the pressure for such an alternative. PAGENO="0798" 1620 ELEMENTAEY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION. AND WELFARE, OFFICE OF EDUCATION. Washington, D.C., February 1967. MEMORANDUM FOR SCHOOL I)IsTRIcTs OPERATING UNDER FREE ChoIcE DEsEGIIEGA'rIoN PLANS We believe it will help school districts this year if they are more fully in- fornied of the procedures the Office of Education will use in reviewing the opera- tion of "free choice' desegregation plans. GENERAL PROCEDURE Each school district with a plan is required to file with the Office of Education by April 15 a report of its anticipated staff and student assignments for next fall. School districts using free choice plans should file the report of their anticipated student assignments within 15 days of the end of the choice period. As soon as we receive the report we will make a preliminary determination of the probable Compliance status of the district. Generally speaking those districts operating under free choice plans which meet the criteria set out below will receive a letter indicating that on the basis of the progress reported they appear to be in compliance with the Act and will require no further review this year. If we later receive information indicating less progress than anticipated or other compliance problems, then a review which looks at all aspects of the desegregation plan may be necessary. CRITERIA FOR EXEMVTION FROM REVIEW ON TIlE BASIS OF SPRING REPORTS Studcnt desegregation For progress in student desegregation beyond what has been achieved in 1966- 67, the criteria for preliminary review are those already set out in Section 181.54 of the guidelines. It should be noted that the guideline percentages apply only in cases where there is a "sizeable percentage of Negro students." In many districts with a small percentage (e.g.. less than 15%-20%) of Negro students more substantial ~rogress in eliminating the dual system than that indicated in Section 181.54 would be expected. staff desegregation Last year sch'l districts requesting a rough guide to expected progress were told that the equivalent of one (lassro°I1I teacher asSigfle(l on a desegregated basis in each schls)l normally would be adequate evidence of a sufficient start on staff desegre~ation, so that no review WOuI(l he required. For the coming school year double that degree of progress and staff desegregation in both formerly white and Negro schools would be expected to assure that a plan is operating effectively. It should be recognized. again, that this can only be a very rough measure. For instance, in districts with a few large schools more progress would be expected, and in districts with a great many small schools less might 1)0 expected. 5)ther factors Other factors that will be considered in making preliminary reviews include: existence of complaints affecting free operation of the plan, existence of small, inadequate segregated schools and other evidence of unequal programs, evidence of building programs which would perpetuate the dual system. and discrimina- tory transfers in or out of the districts. Factors which might indicate adequate progress despite failure to meet the student and staff criteria above might in- (lu(1e such consideration as the special difficulties presented in school districts where there is a very high percentage of Negro enrollment in the schools (such as 70% or 80% or more'~. I) ic triets rcq U in U C PP rjppl. I 6stricts which do not meet the above criteria on the basis of their April 15 reports will he considered to require further review because of probable com- pliance problems. These will he divided into two groups: (a) those districts whose performance falls substantially below the criteria listed above and (h those districts coming closer to the above criteria but still requiring review. PAGENO="0799" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTCATION AMENDMENTS 1621 Each district in these two groups will be notified of its status, and those in category (a) above will be visited for a review on a l)riority basis. Districts in category ( b I will not be visited inimediatelv and should review their own plans carefully and take every possible step to improve their progress before school opens in the fall. Review of these districts is likely to fall during the school year. and adjustnients to achieve compliance are always mole of a prob- lein while school is in session. Sum mer programs In addition to the operation of their regular desegregation plans, school (us- tricts should be alert to the requirement that their special summer programs cannot be operated on a segregated basis. State officials have responsibility for reviewing carefully the proposals for these programs to make certain that ineligible projects are not approved. A bulletin about the requirements for summer J)rogranls is attached. HAROLD HOWE II, U.S. Commissioner of Ed uca t ion. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. EDUCATION, AND WELFARE, OFFICE OF EDUCATION, Washington, D.C., February 8, 1967. MEMORANDUM FOE CHIEF STATE SCHOOL OFFICERS Subject: Civil Rights Compliance in Summer Programs Operated Lnder Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. as Amended. I want to remind you that procedures instituted in 1966 governing civil rights compliance in Title I summer programs remain in effect for projects under- taken by local educational agencies in the summer of 1967. The revised Title VI desegregation guidelines, issued on January 1. 1967, repeat the 1966 provision (~181.14 (b) (4)): All special educational programs, such as preschool, summer school and adult education, and any educational program newly instituted, must be conducted without segregation or any other form of discrimination. Free choice desegregation procedures normally may not be applied to such programs. More detailed explanations of the responsibilities of State agencies for en- forcing this provision are contained in my memoranda of April 25. 1966, and July 1, 1966, on this topic. I urge you to review these documents, as they clearly spell out your responsibilities for assuring that summer programs are operated in a totally desegregated fashion. The Office of Education attaches great importance to the effective iniplementa- tion of these procedures. I hope you will remind the local educational agencies in your State of these requirements. In reviewing and approving applications for summer projects, you are requested to review- thoroughly with the applicant the procedures that it will follow to assure that the program will be fully de- segregated. If projects have already been approved, they should be reviewed again to assure that this requirement is being met. We hope that a careful review- at this time will hell) avoid the necessity of discontinuing or restructur- ing a projoct after it has begun. Title I staff will visit selected State agencies this spring to review with State Title I Coordinators the procedures your agency is following. In the meantime. I hope you will call upon us if we can he of assistance in clarifying any relevant matters. HA1~OL1) HOWE II, U.S. Corn in iss ion cc of Educa tb ii. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. EDt-CATION, AND WELFARE. OFFICE OF EDUCATION. Washington, D.C.. Fcbruauj~ 27. 1967. To: Chief State School Officers, State Title I Coordinators. From: Harold Howe II, U.S. Commissioner of Education. Subject: Use of Title I funds in local school districts undergoing desegregation or in racially segregated attendance areas. In iN report isued on .Tanuary 31 the National Advisory Council on the Educa- tion of Disadvantaged Children made the followiiig comment amid recom- inendation: PAGENO="0800" 1622 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDICATION AMENDMENTS "As racial desegregation of school progresses, reports made to the Council indicate that insufficient planning results in some impoverished Negro children being cut off from the benefits of important programs that may exist in their former segregated schools. . . . A major new area for vigi- lance and administrative care is that of insuring that special educational services follow the eligible child who is transferred under a school desegre- gation program." The purpose of this memorandum is to provide (1) the following statement of policy: no child who would otherwise participate in a Title I activity or service is to be denied such participation because of his exercise of the right to enroll in another school and (2) guidance for the implementation of this poIicy~ In this connection your attention is called to my memoranda of April 25, 1966, on summer programs and of July 1. 1966, on the responsibilities of State edu- cational agencies for compliance with the Civil Rights Act. Your attention is also called to my letter to you dated August 9, 1966, concerning the use of Title I funds for children living in racially segregated attendance areas. Questions have been raised by Title I Coordinators concerning the location of Title I services when children are attending schools under a freedom-of-choice, open enrollment, or other plan designed to bring about desegregation. We realize that with the implementation of such plans local educational agencies may need sonic special guidance in determining the children who will participate in the Title I program. We ask that you advise all Title I applicants in your State as follows: 1. The revised Title I regulations differ from the previous regulations in two important respects regarding project areas: (a) It is no longer permiSsil)le to designate as project areas attendance areas with less than average concentrations of children from low-income families. (b) The regulations specifically state that projects shall he located where the children can best he served. 2. The purpose of the "attendance area" requirement in Title I is to identify the "target population" from which the children with special needs are to be selected. The children in the target population include all children (a) who are attending a particular public school which has a high concen- tration of children from low-income families (see item 4), (b) who had been attending that school, ~ (c) who would be attending that school if they were not attending a private school or another public school under a freedom- of-choice. open enrollment, or other plan designed to bring about desegre- gation. 3. Educationally deprived children from this group should be selected for participation on the basis of the priority of their needs. Appropriate activi- ties and services designed to meet those needs should be provided at locations where the children can best be served which, in most cases, are the schools they now attend. 4. The degree of concentration of children from low-income families for the purpose of determining eligible attendance areas or "target populations" may be estimated, if better data are not available, on the basis of the number or percentage of children from low-income families actually attending each of the schools being operated by the applicant local educational agency. ~. The only basis on which Title I services may be offered in schools en- rollinu children most of whom are not in the "target population" (see item 21 is that those services are designed for and will be serving primarily educa- tionally deprived children selected from that population. Other children who have needs which can he met through such a project may partiei~ate in it hut the number of such children must be limited so as not to dilute the effectiveness of the project for the children for whom it was designed. ui. The types of services that would he appropriate under these circum- stances include special health. nutritional and social services: guidance and ou~elinZ and remedial programs. In applying such services. consideration ~hoiild be given to the special needs of the children in their new school environment. The types of services that on the surface would not he accept- able would include such activities as field trips for large numbers of .hilclren. reneral cultural enrichment activities. construction. and the installation of equipment. PAGENO="0801" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLTATION AMENDMENTS 1623 Again, may I urge you to transmit this ineniorandum to local educational agencies in your State and to establish appropriate procedui'es for theni to follow with respect to future Title I applications and amendments to applications. Please let us know how many copies you need for this purpose. I would appreciate hearing from you concerning any problems you may have in implementing these provisions in your State. MEMORANDUM FROM MR. Louis J. McGuINNEss TO Miss CAROL HERZMAN-TITLE I ESEA (OFFICE OF EDUCATION), WHICH LIST. BY STATE. THE Nu~rB~x OF PRE- SCHOOL PROGRAMS CONDUCTED WITH TITLE I FUNDs We apparently do not have the kind of data in I)CE which ~viI1 satisfy the Perkins Committee request. About the best we can do is provide them with the results of the 1966 summer Title I survey coTering all LE\'s with 1200 students or more (these LEA's have 80% of the lmhlic school children). This survey obtained information on the number of preschool programs and kinder- garten programs utilizing Title I funds last summer. `We have extracted out this information on the States that would l)e involved and it is attached to this memo. I discussed the segregation problem with Mr. David Seeley today and with some of his top staff--they can be of only slight help tn us. They lack data on this subject just as we do. As you know, we have leillished two different guideline memoranda on the subject of desegregation for the purpose of attempt- ing to force integration in Title I summer programs. Copies of these two memo- randa are attached. I have also discussed the segregation problem with both Al White and Paul Miller and they too lack precise data on segregation in Title I programs for their respective States. In effect, we have to consider a program in compliance if the Equal Educational Opportunity office declares a given LEA in compliance. Practically speaking, we are forced to rely on public complaints, which have been very few. Regarding Item #3, the purported shift from OEO Read Start funding to ESEA funding-this is again an area where our data are inadequate. We do not know anything about this with any degree of certainty. It may be possible for the Committee to gather this information from OEO sources. It may also be possible for us to gather "shift" data from State Title I coordinators. MEMORANDUM MARCh 2~, 1967. To: Carol Herzman, Program Officer. From: Louis McGuinness, Assistant Chief. Program Development Branch. The following table, containing information extracted from a U. S. Office of Education survey sent to 6400 s('hool districts with au enrollment of at least 1200 students (such school districts serving 80% of the nation's l)Ublic school pupils), shows the number of school districts in the South who reported having Title I summer school programs serving prekindergarten and kindergarten children. INFORMATION ON THE AMOUNT OF FUNDS AvAILABLE FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF TITLE VI FOR SCHOOL DESEGREGATION FOR EACH OF TIlE LAST THREE FISCAL YEARS 1. Dollar amount for Titles VI and IV, salaries and expenses: Office of Education. (cqual educational opportun itie.s pro'ii'am) ~ request Title \I $109, 000 ~3.434.O00 $5534000 Title IV 1134,000 1.493.000 1,900,000 Total __~4~0~_~2~,000~34,~ 2. Number of Civil Rights I)OsitiOns prior to end of fiscal year 1966: Title VI : 70 (Office of Education, Title VI Unit Title IV: 90. 75-492--67--pt. 2-51 PAGENO="0802" 1624 ELEMENTAEY AND SECONDARY EDITCATION AMENDMENTS Su \i MARY OF [lIE BASIS ANI) GENEIIAL CONTENT OF THE EcoNoMIc OPi'oiiTuNl'rY AMENDMENTS OF 1967 General The Econoiiiic Opportunity Anitiidments of 1967 consist of a section authorizing fiscal year 1968 appropriations for various Economic Opportunity Act programs, and three titles. Only title I includes amenthnents to the Economic Opportunity Act itself. Title II would establish a program to aid in the provision of sum- itier camp opportunities for disadvantaged children, pursuant to a recommenda- tion of the President in his recent Message on Children and Youth. Title III would provide certain criminal sanctions to cover cases of embezzlement, willful misapplication, theft or kickbacks involving financial assistance funds under the Economic Opportunity Act. A ethori~ations Section 2 of the 1)01 would authorize appropriation of $2.06 billion for pro- grams tinder the Economic Opportunity Act for fiscal year 1968, including $874 million for carrying out- the Job Corps and work-training programs under title I of the Act, $1022 billion for community action programs under title II, $47 mil- lion for the rural loan, and migrant and seasonal farm worker programs under title III, $70 million for work-experience programs under title V, $16 million for administration and coordination activities under title VI, and $31 million for VISTA and volunteer programs tinder title VIII. Amendments to the Ecu fl urn ic 0 l)1)OrtU ~i it)/ .1 Ct Title I includes a large number of amendments to the Economic Opportunity Act. These are sufficiently numerous and comprehensive that-partly for tech- nical reasons and partly for greater clarity-major parts of the Act, including job Corps and Community Action. have been rewritten. Although the amendments are substantial both in number and in anticipated over-all impact, they would not change the fundamental character of existing programs. To the contrary, they are predicated on the view that those programs re-and have proved them~eIves to be-sound and effective in basic concept. ~iet no one would pretend that. today, the several programs are simply an exten- sion of what they were in the beginning. They have, to some extent, developed along unanticipate(I paths: they have encountered some unforeseen problems. Policies once tentative. but of major intportanc'e. have been tested. And the experience, not only of the Office of Economic Opportunity. hut of the State and local agencies, and many private groups that have participated in these programs is now sufficient to permit decisions governing long-run program direc- tion that were not possible three years ago. Cumulatively, the adjustments sug- gested by these considerations acid up to a law which will be in some respects less useful than the present Act for the l)rocesses of trying, testing and learn- ing. But it will be a law which, while still retaining flexibility for needed inno- vation. is better suited to the complexities of effective and efficient adminis- tra tion. Many of the arnondments are technical. Some, such as provisions defining the structure and powers of coinnliinity action hoards.1 are designed to deal with specific problems peculiar to a particular program. There are, however. several features which recur repeatedly. Among these are- 1. A hetler foce.tinq of proqranus on thc qoal of helpinq people to help them- ,telrcs to heeome .telf-snffieicnt.------The Economic Opportunity Act represents a na- tional commitment to the elimination of poverty. The needs of the poor are, however, so great and so extensive that it is frequently difficult to maintain a focus upon the causes of poverty as distinguished from its symptoms. Yet for Economic Opportunity Act programs that focus is critical. The bill under- takes to sharpen this focus in a number of ways. For example- (a) It contains a new employment program designed to reach thousands of unemployed or underemployed slum residents many of whom are at best only marginally employable, and to provide them, for the first time, with the kind of intensive help and support needed to enable them to secure and hold the substantial number of meaningful jobs that today exist or can be made available in many urban areas.2 N~w title II (sec. 103 of the bill). sec. 211. New title I-B (sec. 102 of the bill), sec. 123, PAGENO="0803" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1625 it I It spec hen liv directs the cm pie x If ;iil I vi lies represeli ted I y toni- inunity action 1(1 ~e over-all ibJeiti ye the proni it ion if fit!! t;iiilily and individual self-sulh(ieiov.1 c ) It exjiaiitls the (ollcelit tit tile i~iigr~iiit alit! se;isiilizi 1 agricultural worker un grant, currently sta Po! iii I eriiis of a ssist:i lice ill meet lug lìous- i ng, sit nita lion, edui~i t loll and d;i y en Ic needs, lo I iicliide the assistance required to help these wi irkers alit! I iltir faniilies colic with lecilnological changes whiit'h ire ciii tiltg deeper a lid deeper iuii ii even I heir present iiiade- quate livelihood.4 I dl It revises the foriiiuiia iii the present in w rei~i tilig lo the treat- ment under the weif~tre laws of persons iii tr~iiiiiutg or wi rk-traiiiing, so its to provide-and test-a new svsteuii of incentives under which pubiic assistance recipients wouid be encouraged hot wiiv to work but to push their earnings up to tue point where they will get out of poverty? 2. ~S'ti'cte/IIi cit ui1, of fiscal (1)1(1 0 diii to i.stio (nc coo (lois ((lilt stan don/s-As Economic Opportunity Act programs uiiatnre, and as agencies responsible for those programs gain operating experieiice, they should be expected to meet increa singly It igli sta ada rds of efficiency and technical competence. This objective holds true of ~til programs under the Act. The problems in- i-olved are, however, probabiy most complex in Ihie case of ciilliiiiunit action. These local programs may include a wide range of projects arid activities they may inv dye numerous participating agencies : tue ciannlunity action agency itself is likely to be relatively new and Ihere are manifest (liflicuities in de- veloping personnel systeutts which maintain necessary merit feal itres without curtailing job opportunities for poor people who comnioniv lack tile formal edu- cation and training required to satisfy traditional job entrance and promotion requirements. Yet for all these complications, it is clea r tim t if ctoaununi~y action agencies are to perform effectively, and measure up to their responsi- biiities, they must aim for administrative standards which are tint oniv ade- quate but if possible distinctly above Ihose generally acceptable ill the community. The bill includes a substantial number of amendments which are basically designed to improve or tighten administrative standards consistent with the needs and growing technical capabilities of the several programs. These range from specific evaluation requirements which the bill would attach to the Jolt Corps, work-trahiing, and comnniunity action and Inigrant progrilmmls,6 to linmita- tions on ,Job Corps enrollee allowances am! the aihditiomt lit VISTA anti the newly authorized part-timiie volunteer program itf safeguards to assure that fees are not charged for vo!unteer services and that volunteers ibi not displace employed workers.7 Iii time case of conimunity action, the bill includes an exlianded audit and fiscal responsibility provision which would require annual olier~ltiulg it mudits, as well as the prelimtiinary audits now prescr!lteih pri ivide ft ii' the handling of audit disahhowances and require specific controls over the rate of local agency expeuìdi- lures? The b!il sets forth evaluation reqluirelnents, already mentioned above, which cover agency elliciency a~ well as program effectiveness. ~il1d which con- template appointment of counnuttees which could be colnpised of business arid professional macn to advise agencies having particular problems? And it ex- pands and focuses existing program criteria so as to establish for each conm- niunity action agency a specific obligation to achieve and adhere to standards of organization, management and administration that will meet the objective of providing assistance efficiently and free of any taint of partisan political bias or personal and family favoritism. This obligation would be impheniented through rules governing a variety of specific potential problem areas, including staff accountability: salaries, salary increases, travel and per diemn allowance and other employee benefits: hiring. retention and promotion standards: per- sonal and financial conflicts of interest : and partisan political activities.15 New title II (see. ion of the hal). sec. 201. New title ITT-B (sec. 104 (e) of the bill'). secs. all and 212. New title vii (see. 100 of tile bill). New title I-A (sec. 101 of the idIl). sec. 113(a) new title I B (sec. 102 of the bill). sec. 120: new tItle II (sec. 103 of the bill), sees. 215 auiil 222(d) new title Itt-B (sec. 104(e) of the bill). sec. 314. - - New title I-A (see. 101 of the bill). sec. 109 : new tithe I III (see, 10~ of the hull), see. 834. See also the criminal provisions in tithe III of the hill. New title II (see. 103 of the hal), sec. 243(c) and (d). 9 New title IT (see. 1)12 of the hill'). see. 215. 15 New title IT (sec. 103 of the bill), sec. 214. PAGENO="0804" 1626 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS It should be noted that, in addition to provisions which directly prescribe administrative standards, the bill includes a variety of features which should help in eliminating red tape, bolstering administrative resources, particularly in rural areas, or otherwise facilitating greater efficiency in operations. Some of these are described below in connection with amendments relating to the delineation of program purposes, State participation, increased private involve- ment, and improved coordination. 3. A clearer delineation of specific program obiectives.-For all its apparent generality, the Economic Opportunity Act is in fact a complex enactment estab- lishing a number of major programs which are themselves complex-complex in what they seek to do and in the number and variety of problems with which they must deal. There has been-inevitably-debate over the precise paths these programs should follow. This is not undesirable to the extent it involves shaping a program to the realities of what ca,z be done as opposed to theoretical and untested notions of what should be (lone. But unnecessary debate can confuse needlessly. impair effectiveness, result in undue delays and contribute to a kind of inefficiency which defies even the best organization chart. A clearer spelling out of purposes can help minimize this kind of problem. As in the case of improved administration, the problem of program purpose is pl'i l)ahly niost obvious in the case of coiniiiunity action. For a good local community action program must involve not just one hut a number of essential elenients : it cannot he all this or that : it must maintain a balance. This is a cli:iracteristic easily lost sight of by people seeking, not unnaturally, easy or simple-and sometimes flatly inconsistent-solutions to very complicated prob- leiiis. One of the objectives of the amendments is to make this characteristic- the need for balance-explicit in the law anti. by so doing, to help local agencies to develop prorrams that will reflect with increasing precision all that the com- munity action concept l'elfui?'P5.11 But the spelling out or refinement of purposes or basic program standards is not confined to the community action provisions of the bill. Many parts of the amendments. including for example Job Corps provisions specifying more pre- cisely the group to be served and establishing criteria and objectives for center ~rograms and center community relations,'2 would be similarly characterized. They speak to and are designed to reflect programs which have now moved away from initial experimentation and are acquiring a structure which requires more attention to securing the maximum results from established polices than to what those polices should be. 4. A greater emphasis on coordination as a means of assisting state and beat agenvics to overcome specific, practical barriers to more efficient operation.- The better coordination of all anti-poverty programs has been a basic objective of the Economic Opportunity Act. It is, however, probably too easy to view coordination as something which requires only a few, simple decisions by one or more Federal officials from which all kinds of good and desirable things follow with little additional effort. In practice, coordination is much more apt to in- volve continuing attention to a lot of hard details, generally uninteresting in themselves, but cumulatively capable of creating real barriers to efficient and cooperative efforts. These harriers are sometimes best seen-as their conse- quences may be most keenly felt-not by Federal agencies but by people at the State and local level who have ultimate responsibility for translating Federal law-s and regulations into measurable and meaningful results. The coordination and information center provisions of the bill are designed to give greater emphasis to a pragmatic approach that focuses upon the hard, if sometimes grimy. details, and upon the operating problems encountered by State and local agencies in trying to do things a little more effectively and~ efficiently in the midst of a complicated network of laws, rules, conditions, guide- lines and instructions.13 In addition- (a) The Work-training provisions of the bill are designed to make it easier for localities to construct programs that pull together different author- ities now scattered in different parts of the Act, without having to secure separate grants or contracts covering the different activities which a project fully responsive to local needs and opportunities may require.1' 11 New title II (sec. ion of the bill). sec. 201 : also. sec. 212(b) of that title. 12 New title I-A (sec. 101 of the bill). s4'cs. 103, 105, 108(a) and 111. 13 New title VI-B (sec. 105(e) of the bill). ~` New title I-B (sec. 102 of the bill), see. 122. PAGENO="0805" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATIOX AMENDMENTS 1627 (b) The bill contains a provision under which Federal agencies, pursuant to Presidential regulations, may waive and eliminate some of the maze of potentially inconsistent technical requirements with which a local agency may now be saddled when it seeks to put together a single project combining assistance from different Federal sources,15 (c) The community action provisions of the bill include a specific pro- vision designed to lay the basis for joint action by Federal agencies in help- ing local agencies engaged in community action programs to overcome problems arising out of diverse Federal requirements and to make longer range plans than are now generally possibleY' 5. An e.vpan.ded role for States and State agencies.-In the development of Federal grant-in-aid programs, there has been a tendency to observe relatively rigid categories: some types of assistance are given only to the States, with no direct dealings between Federal and local agencies; other assistance, to an in- creasing degree, has been granted directly to local agencies, with no State in- volvement. Some recent legislation has tended to suggest a more flexible and potentially creative approach. The present Economic Opportunity Act, with its provision for Federally assisted State technical assistance agencies to help local communities develop and administer programs, provides an example of this latter approach. The bill undertakes to build upon this relatively small but significamir base for a cooperative Federal-State-local relationship. It thus (011011115 a nuniber of provisions-parti(ularl\- in conimunitv action-designed to expand the use of State resources and capabilities. These include specific provision for State- operated community action programs serving rural and siiia 11cr (`omumunities. for State agency operation of community action special purpose programmis, for Fed- eral-State evaluation projects, and for joint Federal-State funding of specific projects or programs as a means of promoting the better coordination in the use of Federal community action and State funds.'7 The bill also is designed to immake it possible for State technical assistance agencies to play a broader role at the State level than the law now contemplates,~ Further, it contains provisions de- signed to afford States a more explicit role in the Job Corps and to invite their help in Federal coordination efforts.9' 6. An eirpans'ion. of programs is rural areas-The bill contains a number of Provisions designed to stimulate, facilitate and support the expansiomi of pro- gramlis in rural areas. This is omie of the objectives sought to be attained through the greater participation of States and State agencies, as ilescrihed above. An expansion of rural areas programs is also one of the major uses to be made of the additional fiscal year 1908 funds w-hich the hill would authorize-a need which is particularly crucial in view of the impact of reductions in funding for the cur- rent year on comnmunties which had not started or only just initiated l)rograms. The bill further contains provisions designed to focus existing community action authoi'ities more effectively on rural problems : and to encourage the de- velopmnent of joint or common community action projects between urban and rural (`ommunities.21 It seeks to channel technical assistance efforts under the several work-training programs so that they will be particularly helpful to rural (`ollimnunities iii clevel- oping meaningful projects taking full advantage of the niore flexible authority the bill would provide,22 It would, in addition, l)rOvide for an assistant director of the Office of Economic Opportunity who w-ould be charged with responsibility for seeing that rural problems are taken into account in all programs and for developing new programs, procedures and approaches wherever necessary.~ 7. _4n increase in opportunities for, and efforts to secure, prim.'ate individual and organization participation-A striking-and in its scope, novel-character- istic of the Economic Opportunity Act is its reliance upon private as well as public effort and resources. The Act reflects. in this respect, two facts: the problem of ~ New title II (see. 103 of the bin). sec. 241 (11). `~ New title II (sec. 103 of the bill), sec. 241(a). `7New title II (sec. 103 of the bill), sees. 213. 222(b), 222(d). and 241(c~. ~s N~w title II (sec. 103 of the bill). sec. 231. `° New title I-A (see. 10~1 of the bill). sec. 115. ~` New title II (sec. 103 of the bill), see. 231 ; new title VI-B (sec. 105(e) of the bill), sec. 032(2). 21 New title II (sec. 103 of the bill). sec. 240. ~ New title I-B (sec. 102 of the bill), sec. 120. 22Se('. 105(a) of thehill. PAGENO="0806" 162S ELEMENT AEY AND SECONDARY EDLCATION AMENDMENTS poverty is si large ami pressing that it~ solution requires resources well beyond whit public ageni es alitie can coittitiand a nd, in the economy of this nation, po pie \vh) ultimately escape loverty and gain self-sufficiency will do so in most cases thr ugh eiuipi ylielit which only the private sector can provide. Tue hill seeks t pr vide a lasis for eXp;lii(liIlg private participation still fur- titer iii a way that takes iccoutit of both of these facts. It would, for example, authorize a new urban employttient ~)rograII1, specifically designed to operate with au unusual ulleasl1ie of private eunidoyer cooperation.2' It would also expand the possibilities for including on-the-job training elements involving private em- ployers in other \v uk-training prograliIs. In the case of conimunty action, it would specitially recognize the necessity for involving private business, labor and pr fessi ott 1 groups. not just through eoiniiiunity action agency board mem- l)ership. but aisi ( lhr ugh pr jects using the capabilities of these groups in activi- ties to heli the pr obtain jobs or to make managerial and technical expertise niore rea(lily a va ila bk to neighborhood grou~(s: Finally, the bill (Iltenhllates a large increase in private individual citizen par- ticipation-iui (`I nhle(ti a with I-lea(1 Start and child development programs and in a variety of other activities where there is a critical need for the taletits and energes of Oedicuted people. It woul(I. for this purpose, authorize a new part- time v dunteer pa gra Iii designe(l t extend to many thousands of people, young and ((1(1 alike. opjortmunities for uuietningfui and rewarding service in helping the poor to help theutiselves-opportunities which VISTA. with its requirement for full-tune service. ian today offer only to a relative few.7 ADMINISTRATION SENDS TO CONGRESS TIGHTENED AND STRENGTHENED EcoNoMIc OPPORTtNITY Acr OF 1967 A revised and strengthened antipoverty program for Fiscal Year 1968 is pro- posed in the Economic Opportunity Act of 1967, submitted to Congress by the Office of Economic Opportunity today. In effect. a "new" bill has been presented to the Congress. It would: Establish precise procedures and standards to assure fiscal and adminis- trative controls over all programs, including locally administered com- munity action programs. These include requirements for audits, regulations over the rate of local agency expenditures, evaluation reports, and employ- ment standards. Establish safeguards against the use of Federal funds for illegal picketing or demonstrations, and against participation by antipoverty employees in any form of direct action in violation of the law, or in partisan political activity. Expand participation of states in the War on Poverty through expanded use of state agency resources. This includes provision for state-operated community action programs serving rural and smaller communities, and a broader role for state technical assistance agencies. States will be given expanded opportunities for participation in Job Corps, including operation or administration of state-operated programs which carry out the general purposes of Job Corps, Increase involvement of the chief, locally-elected officials, and business, labor. religious and other private organizations, and individuals. E~tahlish a new llacem(nt system for the .Tob Corps to provide maximum eni~loyment ~ ortunities for enrollees. Declare as ineligible for Job Corps persons with a record of violent anti- social behavior and require enforcement of standards of Job Corps conduct that give Job Corps Center Directors authority to take appropriate disci- plinary action. including dismissal. Define new Job Corps practices requiring establishment of relationships between the Centers and surrounding communities, including community advisory councils, which will give communities a new voice in center operations. Tirhten regional assignment provisions so that enrollees will go to centers nearest their homes-thus further reducing enrollee costs. ~ Nw titif I-P. ~ii~ 102 f Ii hill 1 ~ 122. Nw titli I- P ~e. 102 if ti hill . ~oi. 122. Nw titip II ~. 102 f tho lith. sees. 201 (21. 211 (al 212(b) (5). ~Nw iltie VIII sec. 107 of tb hUll sec. ~2O. PAGENO="0807" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS 1629 Expa 11(1 progra IIIS in rural areas wider dj (cit biii f :1 Iii \V ii ssistaut (ii rector charged with implementing all types of afltil)OVeity programs ill rural regions. Draw together diverse work training authorities to make it possible for communities to tailor projects to local needs without the re(1 tape of multiple applications. Define and strengthen the coordinating authority of the Director of the Office of Economic Opportunity and the Economic Opportunity Council over all antipoverty programs. The proposed bill requests authorizations adequate to fund many local com- munity action programs which had to be curtailed by last year's Congressional cuts in appropriations. The proposed $2.06 billion bill is based on experience gained in two and a half years of antipoverty administration. Amendments and new titles are recom- mended that will capitalize on the hard lessons learned in this time. The legislation specifies areas that will be strengthened, spelling them out with exact guidelines and requirements, and codifies areas where the record shows achievement and progress. The Office of Economic Opportunity, which necessarily reached out and tried many new avenues when the War on Poverty was launched in November. 1964. has, in general, redrawn and redefined its lines of attack according to practical successes attained. The thrust of the proposed legislation underscores the paramount purpose of the antipoverty effort-that is, making productive citizens and fully participating citizens of all who now live in poverty. Those in poverty total about 32 million men, women, and children, or approximately 10 million family units. COMMUNITY ACTION Community action program amendments are aimed at taking all steps possible to help the poor obtain knowledge and skills which are needed to become self- sufficient. The present provision that one-third of the governing boards of community action agencies must be representatives of the poor is retained. Added are re- quirements that community action agencies-the locally organized and locally administered antipoverty units-provide an iml)ortant role for public officials, as well as for representatives of business, labor and other private community leadership groups. The amendnients would expand the iiieans of state participation in community action programs, giving a wider role to state technical assistance agencies and providing that state agencies operate or serve as a conduit of funds for specific programs. Local governing boards of community action agencies will be required to have effective control over all 1)~isie programs, planning, budget and personnel policies. Minimum functions are prescribed for (`AAs. and requirements are added for an- nual operating audits, and adiiiinistr~itive and personnel standards ate tightened. There is a provision for appointing conituittees of local business and profes- sional men to advise the li ical community agencies. Stand a ((is a me set for eva lu- ating the effectiveness of the CAA operation. Methods ai'e (leScribed to t'iit red tape and eliminate (lulmli('atioIl where several federal and state agencies are involved in a single lirilieci WORK ANt) TRAINING PIiOGI~A\i5 Work and `Ira ining Pn gram aniencimmients include a new employment program to reach thousands of umlemldoyed (U' umiderenililoved slimi residents. For the first time, it will provide these peolde-niany of them now only marginally era- I)lOyable at best-with intensive assistance needed to get and hold the jobs which exist in urban areas. The amendment further create a new mnanpowei' 1)aekage which includes Neighborhood ~outh Corps and Kennedy-Javits authorities, plus a consolidated Nelson-Scheuem' programmi. They make it possible for commmmnmii tics to deal with one single Federal agency in developing projects that pull together the resources of several Federal programs. These programs, carried out with assistance fm'omn other Federal agencies. would be coordinated by the community action agencies. PAGENO="0808" 1630 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS On-the-job training with private profit-making employers may be included in projects. JOB CORPS The proposed Act spells out provisions for the Job Corps program on which the present law is silent or has only a general provision. The new legislation details that the program is designed to assist low-income, disadvantaged youth in intensive residential programs, while at the same time contributing to the development of resources and the development and spread of techniques for working with such young people. Eligibility criteria are amplified, including a provision that the program is designed for young people with the capabilities and aspirations needed to bene- fit from the program. Procedures for screening applicants and the placement of youth completing training are spelled out for the first time in the 1967 amendments, based on the experience gained in the first two years of the program. The sections on screening clearly prohibit selecting a youth for the program un- less he can participate successfully in group activities, is not likely to engage in activities disruptive to the center's program for others or its relationships w-itli surrounding communities. The proposed Act requires arrangement of assistance to youth completing train- ing, in finding employment, returning to school, or undertaking other activities with career potential. VISTA VISTA amendments provide for the recently-launched Citizens Corps, which expects to recruit between 50.000 and 100.000 part-time volunteers to work in antipoverty projects in their communities. They also establish as a permanent part of VISTA the demonstration program under which volunteers serve as VISTA Associates during the summer months. More than 2,000 will be recruited for this summer, compared with 500 last year. There are provisions requiring that all support for volunteers be provided at the lowest possible cost, that volunteers not be used to displace employed work- ers, and that no agency using volunteers may be paid for the services which they perform. SUMMER CAMP PROGRAM The legislation proposes a Summer Camp Program for underprivileged chil- dren, under the supervision of OEO in partnership with state and local govern- ments and non-profit organizations. With the funds authorized, the federal gov- ernment would provide facilities on Federal lands and, in agreement with state and local authorities, on lands under their jurisdiction. It would also make these lands available to public and non-profit organizations which could sponsor chil- dren from low-income families and areas. The legislation contemplates a large increase in private individual citizen par- ticipation, in connection with Head Start and child development projects and other activities where there is a need for the abilities of dedicated people. MATERIAL ON SCHOOL DESEGREGATION POLICIES OF DHEW OFFICE OF EDUCATION UNDER TITLE VI OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964 TITLE VI-CIvrL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964 NoNDISCRIMINATION IN FEDERALLY AssIsTED PROGRAMS SEC. 601. No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. SEC. 602. Each Federal department and agency which is empowered to extend Federal financial assistance to any program or activity, by way of grant, loan, or contract other than a contract of insurance or guaranty, is authorized and directed to effectuate the provisions of section 601 with respect to such program or activity by issuing rules, regulations, or orders of general applicability which shall he consistent with achievement of the objectives of the statute authorizing the financial assistance in connection with which the action is taken. No such rule, regulation~ or order shall become effective unless and until approved by the PAGENO="0809" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1631 President. Compliance with any requirement adopted pursuant to this section may be effected (1) by the termination of or refusal to grant or to continue assistance under such program or activity to any recipient as to whom there has been an express finding on the record, after opportunity for hearing, of a failure to comply with such requirement, but such termination or refusal shall be limited to the particular political entity, or part thereof, or other recipient as to whom such a finding has been made and, shall be limited in its effect to the particular program, or part thereof, in which such noncompliance has been so found, or (2) by any other means authorized by law: Provided, however, That no such action shall be taken until the department or agency concerned has advised the appropriate person or persons of the failure to comply with the re- quirenient and has determined that compliance cannot be secured by voluntary means. In the case of any action terminating, or refusing to grant or continue, assistance because of failure to comply with a requirement imposed pursuant to this section, the head of the Federal department or agency shall file with the committees of the House and Senate having legislative jurisdietion over the program or activity involved a full written report of the circumstances and the grounds for such action. No such action shall become effective until thirty days have elapsed after the filing of such report. SEC. 603. Any department or agency action taken pursuant to section 602 shall be subject to such judicial review as may otherwise be provided by law for similar action taken by such department or agency on other grounds. In the case of action, not otherwise subject to judicial review, terminating or refusing to grant or to continue financial assistance upon a finding of failure to comply with any requirement imposed pursuant to section 602. any person aggrieved (including any State or political subdivision thereof and any agency of either) may obtain judicial review of such action in accordance with section 10 of the Administrative Procedure Act, and such action shall not be deemed committed to unreviewable agency discretion within the meaning of that section. SEC. 604. Nothing contained in this title shall be construed to authorize action under this title by any department or agency with respect to any employment practice of any employer, employment agency, or labor organization except where a primary objective of the Federal financial assistance is to provide employment. SEC. 605. Nothing in this title shall add to or detract from any existing authority with respect to any program or activity under which Federal financial assistance is extended by way of a contract of insurance or guaranty. [From the Federal Register, Dcc. 4. 1964] TITLE 45-PUBLIC WELFARE SUBTITLE A-DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION. AN!) WELFARE. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION PART 80-NONDISCRIMINATION IN FEDERALLY ASSISTED PROGRAMS OF TIlE DEPART- MENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE-EFFECTUATION OF TITLE VI OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1984 Subtitle A 45 CFR is hereby amended by adding the following new Part 80: Sec. SO.1 Purpose. 80.2 Application of this part. 80.3 Discrimination prohibited. 80.4 Assurances required. 80.5 Illustrative applications. 80.6 Compliance information. 80.7 Conduct of investigations. 80.8 Procedure for effecting compliance. 80.9 Hearings. 80.10 Decisions and notices. 80.11 Judicial review. 80.12 Effect on other regulations; forms and Instructions. 80.1~ Definitions. -. - AUTHORITY The provisions of this Part 80 are Issued under sec. 602. iS Stat. 2o2. and the laws referred to in Appendix A. § 80.1 Purpose. The purpose of this part is to effectuate the provisions of title VI of tile Civil Rights Act of 1964 (hereafter referred to as the "Act~') to the end that no per- son in the United States shall; on the ground of mace, color, or national origin, PAGENO="0810" 1632 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS be excluded from participation in. be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise sub- jeeteci to discriiiiination under any ~rogran1 or activity receiving Federal finan- (jal assistall(e fruiii the I)epartnient of Flea Ith, Education, and Welfare. §80.2 Application of this part. `This part applies to any program for which Federal financial assistance is an- tli rized under a law adniinistered by the Department, including the Federally- assisted pr granis and activities listed in Appendix A of this part. It applies to money paid. pr perty transferred, or ther Federal financial assistance extended under any such program after the effective (late of the regulation pursuant to an application appr ved prior to such effective date. This part does not apply to a any I'e(leIa I tiiianc'ial assistance by way of insurance or guaranty con- traIts, b rn ncy pa 1(1. rperty transferred, or other assista me extended 11fl- dci' any such i n gra mu before I he effective date of this j ;i it, ( c) any a ssistance to any imilivul ual who is the ultirna te beneficiary under any such progm'am, or (Ii any e1n~iuymeni i ractice, under any such program, of any employer. em- ploynient agency, or labor organization, except to the extent described in § 80.3. `Flie fact that a programii 01 a('tivitv is not listed in Appendix A shall not mean, if Title ~ I f 1 he At is otherwise applicable, that such program is not covered. tither programs under statutes 11W in force or hereinafter enacted may i)e added to this list by notice published in the Fm:iwi~.&i, REGISTER. § 80.3 Discrimination prohibited. a Gcoccal. ~o person in the United States shall, on thegi' ounll of race, color, or national origin be excluded from participation in. be denied the benefits of. or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program to which this part applies. b .Siecf.tie iljs~,j~i inatoi~j actions pro/i ibit(d. (1) A recipient unUer any prIglani to \vhii('ll this part applies may not. directly or through contractual or 0th er a ira ngemnemits. on ground of race, color. or national origin Deny au individual any service, financial aid, or other benefit provided un Icr the program i~) Pr ide any service. fimiamicia 1 aid, or other benefit to an individual which is ditleremit. Or 15 pi'oviieil iii a litlerent nianner. from that provided to others under the l)i' gi'aiii I iii I Subject an individual to segregation oi' separate treatment in any mimatter related to his receipt of iinv service, financial aid. OI' other henetit under the programil I iv j Eestrict an imilividual in any way iii the enjoyment of any advantage or privilege enjoyed by others receiving any service, financial aid. or other benefit under the program I v ) Treat an i mid i vi dual differently from others in deterinimiing whether lie sa tisties any admiiission. enrollment, quota. eligibility. uiiemlfl)ersllil) oi' other ic- quirement or c wditi In which individuals miiust meet in om'der to be I)rovided amiy service, financial aid, or other benefit provided tinder the pi'ogram 1 vi) Deny an individual an opportunity to pai'ticipate in the program though the provisimi it sem'Vices 1' )thierwise or afford hiiii aim opportunity to 10 50 whi cli is diflcm'c'mit film that afforded othem's tinier the program (including the opportunity to participate in the programil as an eiiiplovee l)ut only to the extent set forth in parauraph I c I of this setin I 2 A recipient. in detei'mniiiing the types of services, financial aid. oi' other benefits. or t~icil ities which will be pm'ovi ded undem' aiiy such ~n'ogramn. or the ilass of iil(1ivi(T11iils to whom, or the situations in which, such services, financial aid. of her benefits, or facilities will be pm'ovided under any such program. om' the i'liiss of' individuals to 1w afforded an opportunity to pam'ticipate in any such program. iiiay not. directly 01' tlii'ough contractual oi' other ai'i'aiigements. utilize criteria 01' milethols of a(lmuimii stiation which have the effect of subjecting individuals to discrimination because of their i'ace, cdoi'. om' national origin. or have the effect I ~ let'ea timig 1' substantially imnpa irilig a cc'oniplislimuent of the h~ec'tives ni time I)!' gia Ill as respect i ndivi dna Is of a pa i'ticulai' race. c' ibm'. 01' national om'igi n. I 2 I As used in this section the sei'vices. financial aid. om' othem' benefits i)m'O- videcl tinder a I Irogra in iced yin ii Federal financial a ssi sta nec sli all i)e deemed to include any service. financial a id 01' ctlier benefit i'oviied ill 1' thi'otigh a facility pr Ivided with I lie iii of Federal fin;i ncial assi~ztance. 4 I The enuinei'atiomi of specific forms of prohibited (hisci'imnination in this paragraph and paragi'aph (ci of this section does not limit tile generality of the p1' lb ihition in pa ra graph (a 1 of this section. PAGENO="0811" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTTCATIOX AMENDMENTS 1633 (c) Employment practices. Where a primary objective of the Federal finan- cial assistance to a program to which this part applies is to provide employment, a recipient may not (directly or through contractual or other arrailgements) subject an individual to discrimination on the ground of race, color, or national origin in its employment practices under such program including recruitment or recruitment ad verti sing, employment, layoff or termination, upgrading, demotion, or transfer, rates of pay or other forms of compensation, and use of facilities), including programs where a primary objective of the Federal fin~iiicial assistance is ( i ) to reduce the unemployment of such individuals or to help theiti through employment to meet subsistence needs. (ii) to assist such individuals through employment to meet expenses incident to the commencement or continuation of their education or training, (iii) to provide work experience which contributes to the education ot' training of such individuals, or (iv) to provide I'emuneratjve activity to such individuals who because of severe handicaps ~a illiot he readily absorbed in the competitive labor market. The following progi'aiiis under exist- ing laws have one of the ahove objectives as a I)l'illlary objective (a ) I )epa i'tiiient l)ro~ects under the Public Works Acceleration Act, i'ublic Law- ST-058. b ) ( `onmmnunitv work and training programs under title IV of the Social Se- curity Act, 42 T'.S.('. hOP. e ( Work-study program under the Vocational Education Act of 1003. P.L. 88-210. sec. 13. (d ( Progranis listed in Appendix A as respects eiiiploymnent )Iq)ortunities pro- vided thereunder, or in facilities provided thereunder, which ale liimiited. om' for which preference is given, to students, fellows, or othem' pei'sons in training for the same or related employments, (e I Estahlishimiient- of sheltered workshops under the ~ocational Rehabilitation Act, 20 F.S.C. 32-34, The i'equiremuents applicable to construction employment mmdci' an such pro- gram shall be those specified in or pursuant to Executive Order 11114. (1) In (han health, and Cu ban Ref uqee programs. An individual shall not be deemed subjected to discrimination by reason of his exclusion from the benefits of a program limited by Federal law to individuals of a particular race, color, or national origin different from his. (e) lied ,cal cam ergen cic.m. Notwithstanding the foregoing 1)rovisions of this section. a recipient of Federal financial assistance shall not he deemed to have failed to comply w-ith paragraph (a) of this section if immediate provision of a service or other benefit to an individual is necessary to l)i'eVt'iit his death or serious impairment of his health, and such service or other imetieuit cannot he provided except by or through a medical institution which refuses or fails to comply with paragraph (a) of this section. § 80.4 Assurances required. (a ) General. 1) Evem'~- application for Federal financial assista lice to carry out a program to which this l)art applies. except a program to which paragi'aph (h) of this section applies, and every application for Federal financial assistance to provide a facility shall, as a condition to its approval and the extension of any Federal financial assistance pursuant to the application, colita iii or be ac- compaimied by an assurance that the program will he conducted or the facility operated in compliance with all requirements imposed by or pursuant to this part. In the ease of an application for Federal financial assistance to l)i'ovide real property or structures thei'eon. the assurance shall obligate the recipient, or. in the ease of a subsequent transfei'. the transferee, for the period during w-hich the real property or structures ai'e used for a purpose for which the Federal financial assistance is extended or for anothem' l)urh)ose involving the provision of similar services or benefits. In the case of personal property the assurance shall obligate the recipient for the period during which lie retains ownership or possession of the property. In all other cases the assurance shall obligate the recipient for the period during which Federal financial assistance is extended pursuant to the application. The responsible Dep~mm'tiiient official shall specify the form of the foregoing assurances for each pro~rani. and the extent to which like assurances will he required of suhgrantee~. contractors and subcontractors, transferees. successors in interest, and other pu'ticitauts in the program. Any such assurance shall include provisions which nyc the Tinted States a right to seek its judicial enforcement. PAGENO="0812" 1634 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS ~2) The assurance required in the case of a transfer of surplus real property shall be inserted in the instrument effecting the transfer of any such surplus land, together with any improvements located thereon, and shall consist of (i) a condition coupled with a right to be reserved to the Department to revert title to the property in the event of breach of such nondiscrimination condition during the period during which the real property is used for a purpose for which the Fed- eral tinaiicial assistance is extended or fur another purpose involving the provision of similar services or benefits, and (ii) a covenant running with the land for the same period. In the event a transferee of surplus real property proposes to mortgage or otherwise encumber the real property as security for financing con- struction of new, or improvement of existing, facilities on such property for the purposes for which the property was transferred, the Secretary may agree, upon request of the transferee and if necessary to accomplish such financing, and upon such conditions as he deems appropriate, to forbear the exercise of such right to revert title for so long as the lien of such mortgage or other encumbrance remains effective. h) Continuing State programs. Every application by a State or a State agency to carry out a program involving continuing Federal financial assistance to which this part applies (including the programs listed in Part 2 of Appendix A) shall as a condition to its approval and the extension of any Federal finan- cial assistance pursuant to the application (1) contain or be accompanied by a statement that the program is or, in the case of a new program, will be) conducted in compliance with all requirements imposed by or pursuant to this part. or a statement of the extent to which it is not, at the time the statement is made. so conducted. antI (2) provide or be accompanied by provision for such methods of administration for the program as are found by the responsible Department official to give reasonable assurance that the applicant and all re- cipients of Federal financial assistance under such program will comply with all requirements imposed by or pursuant to this part, including methods of ad- ministration which give reasonable assurance that any noncompliance indicated in the statement under subparagraph (1) of this paragraph will be corrected. ci Elementarij and secondary schools. The requirements of paragraph (a) or b) of this section with respect to any elementary or secondary school or school system shall be deemed to be satisfied if such school or school system (1) is subject to a final order of a court of the United States for the desegregation of such school or school system. and provides an assurance that it will comply with such order. including any future modification of such order, or (2) sub- mits a plan for the desegregation of such school or school system which the Com- missioner of Eluc'atioa determines is adequate to accomplish the purposes of the Act an(1 this part, and provides reasonable assurance that it will carry out such plan: in any case of continuing Federal financial assistance the Com- missioner may reserve the right to redetermine, after such period as may be specified by him. the adequacy of the plan to accomplish the purposes of the Act and this part. In any case in which a final order of a court of the United States for the desegregation of such school or school system is entered after submission of such a plan, such plan shall be revised to conform to such final order. including any future modification of such order. di Is.~iirances from institutions. (1) In the case of any application for Fed- eral financial assistance to an institution of higher education (including as- sistance for construction, for research. for a special training project, for a stu- dent loan program. or for any other purpose). the assurance required by this sec- tion shall extend to admission practices and to all other practices relating to the treatment of students. (2) The assurance required with respect to an institution of higher educa- tion. hospital. or any other institution, insofar as the assurance relates to the institution's practices with respect to admission or other treatment of indi- viduals as students. patients. or clients of the institution or to the opportunity to imrticipate in the provision of services or other benefits to such individuals, shall he applicable to the entire institution unless the applicant establishes, to the satisfaction of the responsible Department official, that the institution's practices in desiunated parts or progranis of the institution will in no way affect its practices in the program of the institution for which Federal financial assist- ance is sought. or the beneficiaries of or participants in such program. If in any such case the assistance sought is for the construction of a facility or part of PAGENO="0813" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS 1635 a facility, the assurance shall in any event extend to tile entire facility and to facilities operated in connection therewith. § 80.5 Illustrative applications. The following examples will illustrate the application of the foregoing provi- sions to some of the major programs of tile Department. In all cases the dis- crimination prohibited is discrimination oil the gronnd of race, color, or national origin prohibited by title VI of the Act and this part, as a conoition of the re- ceipt of Federal financial assistance.) (a) In grant programs which support the provision of health or welfare serv- ices, discrimination in the selection or eligibility of individuals to receive tile services and segregation or other discriminatory practices in the manner of providing them, are prohibited. This l)rohibitiOll extends to all facilities and services provided by the grantee under the program or. if tile grantee is a State, by a political subdivision of the State. It extends also to services purchased or otherwise obtained by the grantee or political subdivision) from hospitals, nursing homes, schools, and similar institutions for beneficiaries of the pro- gram. and to the facilities in which such services are provided, subject, how-ever, to the provisions of § 80.3(e). (b) In the Federally-affected area programs (P.L. 813 and P.L. 874) for con- struction aid and for general support of the operation of elementary or second- ary schools, or in programs for more limited support to such schools such as for the acquisition of equipment, the provision of vocational education, or the provision of guidance and counseling services, discrimination by the recipient school district in nny of its elementary or secondary schools in the admission of students, or ill the treatment of its students in any aspect of the educational process, is prohibited. In this and tile following illustrations the prohibition of discrimination in the treatment of students or other trainees includes the pro- hibition of discrimination among the students or trainees in the availability or use of any academic, dormitory, eating, recreational, or other facilities of the grantee or other recipient. (c) In a research, training, demonstration, or other grant to a university for activities to be conducted in a graduate school, discrimination in the ad- mission and treatment of students in the graduate school is prohibited, and the prohibition extends to the entire university unless it satisfies the responsi- ble Department official that practices with respect to other parts or programs of the university will not interfere, directly or indirectly, w-ith fulfillment of the assurance required with respect to the graduate school. (dl In a training grant to a hospital or other nonacademic institution, dis- erimination is prohibited in the selection of individuals to be trained and in their treatment by the grantee during their training. In a research or demonstra- tion grant to such an institution discrimination is prohibited with respect to any educational activity and any provision of medical or other services and any financial aid to individuals incident to tile program. Ic) In grant programs to assist in the construction of facilities for the provi- sion of health, educational or welfnre services assurances will be required that services will he provided without discrimination, to the same extent that dis- erhnination would be prohibited as a condition of Federal operating grants for the support of such services. Thus, as a condition of grants for the construction of academic, research, or other facilities at institutions of higher education, as- surances will he required that there will he no discrimination in the admission or treatment of students. In the case of hospital construction grants the as- surance will apply to patients, to interns, residents, student nurses, and other trainees, and to the privilege of physicians, dentists, and other professionally qualified persons to practice in the hospital, and will apply to tile entire facility for which, or for a part of which the grant is made, and to facilities operated in connection therewith. In other construction grants the assurances required will similarly be adapted to the nature of the activities to be conducted in the facilities for construction of which the grants have been authorized by Congress. (f) Upon transfers of real or personal surplus property for health or educa- tional uses, discrimination is prohibited to tile same extent as in the case of rrants for the construction of facilities or the provision of equipment for like purposes. (z) Ench applicant for a grant for the construction of educational television facilities is required to provide an assurance that it will, in its broadcast PAGENO="0814" 1636 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS services, give due consideration to the interests of all significant racial or ethnic groups within the population to be served by the applicant. (h A recipient may not take action that is calculated to bring about indirectly what this part forbids it to accomplish directly. Thus a State, in selecting or approving projects or sites for the construction of public libaries which will receive Federal financial assistance. may not base its selections or approvals on criteria which have the effect of defeating or of substantially impairing accom- plishment of the objectives of the Federal assistance program as respects individ- uals of a particular race, color, or national origin. § 80.6 Compliance information. (a) Cooperation (hut assistance. Each responsible Department official shall to the fullest extent practicable seek the cooperation of recipients in obtaining compliance with this part and shall provide assistance and guidance to recipients to help them comply voluntarily with this part. (b Compliance reports. Each recipient shall keep such records and submit to the responsible Department official or his designee timely, complete and accu- rate compliance reports at such times, and in such form and containing such information, as the responsible Department official or his designee may deter- mine to be necessary to enable him to ascertain whether the recipient has com- plied or is cornplyinr with this part. In the case of any program under which a primary recipient extends Federal financial assistance to any other recipient, such other recipient shall also submit such compliance reports to the primary recipient as may 1)0 necessary to enable the primary recipient to carry out its obligations under this part. (c) ,4cccsm to sources of information. Each recipient shall permit access by the responsible Department official or his designee during normal business hours to such of its hooks, records, accounts, and other sources of information, and its facilities as may he pertinent to ascertain compliance with this part. Where any information required of a recipient is in the exclusive possession of any other arency. institution or person and this agency. institution or person shall fail or refuse to furnish this inforniation, the recipient shall so certify in its report and shall set forth what efforts it has made to obtain the information. (dl Information to beneficiaries and participants, Each recipient shall make available to participants, beneficiaries, and other interested persons such infor- n)ation regarding the provisions of this part and its applicability to the program under which the recipient receives Federal financial assistance, and make such information available to them in such manner, as the responsible Department official finds necessary to apprise such persons of the protections against dis- crimination ass ured them by the Act and this part. § 80.7 Conduct of investigations. (al Periodic compliance renews. The responsible Department official or his designee shall from tinie to time review the practices of recipients to determine whether they are complying with this part. (b) (`einplaintk. Any person who believes himself or any specific class of individuals to he subjected to discrimination prohibited by this part may by hims'~lf or by a l'epresentative file with the responsible Departn~ent official or l)is designee a wrItten complaint \complaint must he filed not later than 90 days from the date of the alleged discrimination, unless the time foi' filing is extended by the responsible Department official or his designee, (cI Ini'estiqqt ions, The responsible Department official or his designee will make a prompt investigation whenever a compliance review, report, complaint, or any other information indicates a possible failure to comply with this part. The investigation should include, where appropriate, a review of the pertinent lwactices and policies of the recipient, the circumstances under which the possi- ble noncompliance with this part occurred, and other factors relevant to a de- termination as to whether the recipient has failed to comply with this part. (d) Rrsolution of matters. (Ii If an investigation pursuant to paragraph c) of this section indicates a failure to comply with this part, the responsible Pennrfn)pnt official or his designee will so inform the recipient and the matter will he resolved by informal means whenever possible, If it has been determined that the matter cannot he resolved by informal means, action will he taken as provided for in § SOS. PAGENO="0815" ELEMENTARy AND SECONDARy EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1637 (2) If an investigation does not warrant action pursuant to subparagraph (1) of this paragraph the responsible Department official or his designee will so in- form the recipient and the complainant, if any, in writing. (e) Intiniidatory or retaliatory acts prohibited. No recipient or other person shall intimidate, threaten, coerce, or discriminate against any individual for the purp~ se of in terferi hg wit Ii any right or pri viIfge secii led by sect lou (0 of the Act or this part, or because he has made a complaint, testified, assisted, or partici- pated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing under this part. The identity of complainants shall be kept confidential except to the extent neces- sary to carry out the purposes of this part, including the conduct of any investiga- tion, hearing, or judicial proceeding arising thereunder. § 80.8 ~Procedure for effecting compliance. (a) General. If there appears to be a failure or threatened failure to comply with this regulation, and if the noncompliance 01. threatened noncompliance can- not be corrected by informal means, coluupliiuhu(e with this part nuay be effected by the suspension or termination of or refusal to grant or to (1 untinue Federal liIu:uicial assistaiuce or by any other meuuuus authorized by law. Such other means nuav include. but are not limited to. (1 ) a reference to the I)epartnient of Justice with a recommendation that appropriate Proceedings be brought to enforce any rights of the United States under any law of the United States (including other titles of the Act), or any assurance or other contractual undertaking, and (2) any applicable proceeding under State or local law. (b) Noncompliance with § 80.4. If an applicant fails or refuses to furnish an assurance required under § 80.4 or otherwise fails or refuses to comply with a requirement imposed by or pursuant to that section Federal financial assistance may be refused in accordance with the procedures of paragraph (c) of this sec- tion. The Department shall not be required to provide assistance in such a case during the pendency of the administrative proceedings under such paragraph except that the Department shall continue assistance (luring the 1)endency of such proceedings where such assistance is due and payable pursuant to an ap- plication therefor approved prior to the effective date of this part. C) Term iiuatioa of oi' r(fu(clf to (/100 t or to eon tin ue Fedejol flu (Inejal ciz.~j.~t- anc'e. No order suspending, terminating or refusing to grant or continue Federal financial assistance shall become effective until (1) the responsible Department official has advised the applicant or recil)iehut of his failure to comply 811(1 has do- terinined that compliance cannot be secured by voluntary menus, (2) there has been an express finding on the record, after ol)portunity for hearing, of a failure by the applicant or recipient to comply with a requirement imposed by or pur- suant to this part, (3) the action has been approved by the Secretary pursuant to ~ SO.10(e), and (4) the expiration of 30 days after the Secretary has filed with the conimittee of the House and the committee of the Senate having legislative jurisdiction over the program involved, a full written report of the circumstances and the grounds for such action. Any action to suspend or terminate or to re- fuse to grant or to continue Federal financial assistance shall be limited to the particular political entity. or part thereof, or other applicant or recipient as to whom such a finding has been made and shall l)e limited in its effect to the par- ticular program, or part thereof, in which such noncompliance has been so found. (d) Other means antluori~ed by law. No action to effect compliance by any other means authorized by law shall be taken until (1) the responsible Depart- ment official has determined that compliance cannot be secured by voluntary means. (2) the nation has heen approved by the Secretary, (3) the recipient or other person has been notified of its failure to comply and of the action to he taken to effect cflflhj)liance. and (4) the expiration of at least 10 (lays from the mailing of such notice to the recipient or other person. During this period of at least 10 days additional efforts shall he made to persuade the recipient or other person to comply with the regulation and to take such corrective action as may l)e a ppropriate. § 8O.~ Hearings. (al Opportumnit// for hearinq. Whenever an opportunity for a hearing is re- quired by ~ 80.8(c), reasonable notice shall he given by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, to the affected applicant or recipient. This notice shall advise the applicant om' recipient of the action proposed to he taken, the specific provision under which the proposed action against it is to he taken, and the matters of fact or law asserted as the basis for this action, and either (1) PAGENO="0816" 163S ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS fix a date not less than 20 days after the date or such notice within which the applicant or recipient may request of the responsible Department official that the matter be scheduled for hearing or (2) advise the applicant or recipient that the matter in question has been set down for hearing at a stated place and time. The time and place so fixed shall be reasonable and shall be subject to change for cause. The complainant, if any, shall be advised of the time and place of the hearing. An applicant or recipient may waive a hearing and submit written information and argument for the record. The failure of an applicant or recipi- ent to request a hearing under this paragraph or to appear at a hearing for which a date has been set shall be deemed to be a waiver of the right to a hearing under section t02 of the Act and § 80.8(c) of this part and consent to the making of a decision on the basis of such information as is available. (b) Time and place of hearing. Hearings shall be held at the offices of the Department in Washington, D.C., at a time fixed by the responsible Department official unless he determines that the convenience of the applicant or recipient or of the Department requires that another place be selected. Hearings shall be held before the responsible Department official or, at his discretion, before a hearing examiner designated in accordance with section 11 of the Admin- istrative Procedure Act. (c) Right to counsel. In all proceedings under this section, the applicant or recipient and the 1)epartment shall have the right to be represented by counsel. (d) Proc~dures. ceidence. and record. (1) The hearing, decision, and any ad- ministrative review thereof shall be conducted in conformity with sections 5-S if the Administrative l'rocedure Act, and in accordance with such rules of pro- cedure as are proper (and not inconsistent with this section) relating to the conduct of the hearing, giving of notices subsequent to those provided for in paragraph (a) of this section. taking of testimony, exhibits, arguments and briefs, requests for findings, and other related matters. Both the Department and the applicant or recipient shall be entitled to introduce all relevant evidence on the issues as stated in the notice for hearing or as determined by the officer conducting the hearing at the outset of or during the hearing. 2 Technical rules of evidence shall not apply to hearings conducted pursu- ant to this part. but rules or principles designed to assure production of the most credible evidence available and to subject testimony to test by cross-examination shall be applied where reasonably necessary by the officer conducting the hear- ing. The hearing officer may exclude irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly repeti- tious evidence. All documents and other evidence offered or taken for the record shall be open to examination by the parties and opportunity shall be given to refute facts and arguments advanced on either side of the issues. A transcript shall be made of the oral evidence except to the extent the substance thereof is stipulated for the record. All decisions shall be based upon the hearing record and written findings shall be made. (e) Consolidated or Joist Hearings. In cases in which the same or related facts are asserted to constitute noncompliance with this regulation with respect to two or more programs to which this part applies, or noncompliance with this part and the regulations of one or more other Federal departments or agen- cies issued under Title VI of the Act, the Secretary may, by agreement with such other departments or agencies where applicable, provide for the conduct of consolidated or joint hearings, and for the application to such hearings of rules of procedures not inconsistent with this part. Final decisions in such cases, insofar as this regulation is concerned, shall be made in accordance with § 80.10. ~ 80.10 Decisions and notices. (a) Decision by person other than the responsible Dcpartme-nt official. If the hearing is held by a hearing examiner such hearing examiner shall either make an initial decision, if so authorized, or certify the entire record including his recommended findings and l)roPOsed decision to the responsible Department official for a final decision, and a copy of such initial decision or certification shall be mailed to the applicant or recipient. Where the initial decision is made by the hearing examiner the applicant or recipient may within 30 days of the mailing of such notice of initial decision file with the responsible Depart- nieiit official his exc'eptions to the initial decision, with his reasons therefor. In the absence of exceptions, the responsible Department official may on his own motion within 45 days after the initial decision serve on the applicant or recipi- ent a notice that he will review the decision. Upon the filing of such excep- PAGENO="0817" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1639 tions or of such notice of review the responsible Department official shall review the initial decision and issue his own decision thereon including the reasons therefor. In the absence of either exceptions or a notice of review the initial decision shall constitute the final decision of the responsible Department official. (b) Decisions on record or review by the responsible J)epartnieet official. Whenever a record is certified to the responsible Department official for decision or he reviews the decision of a hearing examiner pursuant to paragra~)h a) of this section, or whenever the responsible Department official conducts the hear- ing, the applicant or recipient shall be given reasonable opportunity to file with him briefs or other written statements of its contentions, and a copy of the final decision of the responsible Department official shall be given in writing to the applicant or recipient and to the complainant, if any. (c) Decisions on record wl~erc a hearing is waived. `Whenever a hearing is waived pursuant to § 50.9(a) a decision shall be macic by the responsible depart- mental official on the record and a copy of such decision shall he given in writing to the applicant or recipient, and to the complainant, if any. (d) Rulings required. Each decision of a hearing officer or responsible De- partment official shall set forth his ruling on each finding. cenclusion. or excep- tion presented, and shall identify the requirement or requirements imposed by or pursuant to this part with which it is found that the apl)licant or recipient has failed to comply. (e) Approval by Secretary. Any final decision of a responsible Department official (other than the Secretary) which provides for the suspelision or termi- nation of, or the refusal to grant or continue Federal financial assistance, or the imposition of any other sanction available under this Part or the Act, shall promptly be transmitted to the Secretary, who may approve such decision. may vacate it, or remit or mitigate any sanction imposed. (f) Content of orders. The final decision may provide for suspension or termination of. or refusal to grant or continue Federal financial assistance, iii whole or in part, under the program involved, and may contaiii such terms. conditions, and other provisions as are consistent with and will effectuate the purposes of the Act and this part, including provisions designed to assure that no Federal financial assistance will thereafter be extended under such program to the applicant or recipient determined by such decision to be in default in its performance of an assurance given by it pursuant to this part, or to have other- wise failed to c(~nIp1y with this part, unless and until it corrects its noncom- pliance and satisfies the responsible Department official that it will fully coiiiply with this part. § 80.11 Judicial review. Action taken pursuant to section (302 of the Act is Sul)ject to judicial review as provided in section (303 of the Act. § 80.12 Effect on other regulations; forms and instructions. (a) Effect on othi er regulations. All regulations, orders, or like directions heretofore issued by any officer of the Department which impose requirements designed to prohibit any discrimination against individuals on the ground of race, color, or national origin under any program to which this p~1rt applies, and which authorize the suspension or termination of or refusal fl grant or to con- tinue Federal financial assistance to any applicant for or recipient of such assistance under such program for failure to comply with such requirements. are hereby superseded to the extent that such discrimination is prohibited by this part, except that nothing in this part shall be deemed to relieve any 1)erson of any obligation assumed or imposed under any such superseded regulation. order, instruction, or like direction prior to the effective date of this part. Nothing in this part, however, shall be deemed to supersede any of the following (including future amendments thereof) (1) Executive Orders 1092~ and 11114 and regulations issued thereunder, (2) the "Standards for a Merit System of Personnel Administration," issued jointly by the Secretaries of Defense, of Health, Education, and Welfare, and of Labor, 25 F.R. 734. or (3) Executive Order 11063 and regulations issued thereunder, or any othei' regulations or in- structions, insofar as such Order, regulations, or instructions prohibit discrimi- nation on the ground of race, color, or national origin in any program or situa- tion to which this part is inapplicable, or prohibit discrimination on ally other ground. 75-492-67-pt. 2-52 PAGENO="0818" 1640 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS (b) Pot-ins and instructions. Each responsible Department official shall issue and promptly make available to interested persons forms and detailed instruc- tions and procedures for effectuating this part as applied to programs to which this part applies and for which he is responsible. (c) ,Supcrrisio'n and coordination. The Secretary may from time to time assign to officials of the Departnient, or to officials of other departments or ageacics of the Government with the consent of such departments or agencies, responsibilities in connection with the effectuation of the purposes of title VI of the Act and this part (other than responsibility for final decision as provided in § SOlO), including the achievement of effective coordination and maximuni uniformity within the Department and within the Executive Branch of the Government in the application of title VI and this part to similar programs and in similar situations. § 80.13 Definitions. As used in this part- zi) The term "Department" means the Department of Health, Education. and Welfare, and includes each of its operating agencies and other organiza- tional units. 4 N The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of Health, Education, and `Welfare. (c) The term "responsible Department official" with respect to any program receiving Federal financial assistance means the Secretary or other official of the Department who by law or by delegation has the principal responsibility within the Department for the administration of the law extending such assistance. 4 d) The term "United States" menns the States of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam. Wake Island. the Canal Zone, and the territories and possessions of the United States. and the term "State" means any one of the foregoing. (e 4 The term "Federal financial assistance" includes (1) grants and loans of Federal funds. (24 the grant or donation of Federal property and interests in property. (3) the detail of Federal personnel. (4) the sale and lease of, and the permission to use 4 on other than a casual or transient basis), Federal prop- erty or any interest in such property without consideration or at a nominal consideration, or at a consideration which is reduced for the purpose of assist- ing the recipient. or in recognition of the public interest to be served by such sale or lease to the recipient. and (5) any Federal agreement. arrangement, or other contract which has as one of its purposes the provision of assistance. (f 4 The term "program" includes any program. project. or activity for the provision of services, financial aid, or other benefits to individuals (including education or training. health. welfare, rehabilitation, housing, or other services, whether provided through employees of the recipient of Federal financial assist- ance or provided by others through contracts or other arrangements with the recipient, and including work opportunities and cash or loan or other assistance to individuals), or for the provision of facilities for furnishing services, financial aid or other benefits to individuals. The services, financial aid, or other benefits provided under a program receiving Federal financial assistance shall he deemed to include any services, financial aid, or other benefits provided with the aid of Federal financial assistance or with the aid of any non-Federal funds, property. or other resources required to be expended or made available for the program to meet matching requirenients or other conditions which must he met in order to receive the Federal financial assistance, and to include any services, financial aid. or other benefits iirovi(led in or through a facility provided with the aid of Federal financial assistance or such non-Federal resources. 4 The i erm "facility" includes all or any portion of structures, equipment. or other real or personal property or interests therein, and the provision of facilities includes the con$rnction. expansion, renovation, remodelhig, alteration or acquisition of faciliiies. (hi The term "recipient" means any State. political subdivision of any State, or imi4ruuientality of any State er political subdivision, any public or private agency. institution, or organization, or other entity. or any individual, in any State. to whom Federal financial assistance is extended, directly or through another recipient. for any program. including any successor. assign, or trans- force thereof. but such term does not include any ultimate beneficiary under any such program. PAGENO="0819" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1641 (i) The term "primary recipient" means any recipient which is authorized or required to extend Federal financial assistance to another recipient for the purpose of carrying out a program. (j) The term "applicant" means one who submits an application, request, or plan required to be approved by a responsible Department official, or by a primary recipient, as a condition to eligibility for Federal financial assistance, and the term "application" means such an application, request, or plan. Effective date. This part shall become effective on the 30th day following the date of its publication in the FEDERAL REGISTER. Dated: November 27, 1964. [SEAL] ANTImONy J. CELEBREZZE, ~Secretary of Health, Education, and TVelfare. Approved: December 3, 1964. LYNDON B. JOHNSON. APPENDIX A PROGRAMS TO WHICH THIS PART APPLIES Part 1. Programs other than 8tate-admini.~t(re(1 contin ning programs. 1. Experimental hospital facilities (sec. 624, Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 291n). 2. Health research facilities (title VII, part A, Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 292-292j). 3. Teaching facilities for medical, dental, and other health Personnel (title VII, part B, Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 293-293h; sees. 801-804, Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 296-296a-c). 4. Mental retardation research facilities (title VII, part D, Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 295-295e). 5. University affiliated mental retardation facilities (part B, Mental Retarda- tioti Facilities Construction Act, 42 U.S.C. 2661-2665). 6. Heart disease laboratories and related facilities for patient care (see. 412(d), Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 287a (d)). 7. Municipal sewage treatment works sec. 6, Federal `Water Pollution Con- trol Act, 33 U.S.C. 466e). 8. Loans for acquisition of science, matllelllati('s. and foreigii language equip- ment (title III, National Defense Education Act. 20 U.S.C. 445). 9. Construction of facilities for institutions of higher education Higher Edu- cation Facilities Act, 20 U.S.C. 701-757). 10. School construction in Federally-affected areas (20 U.S.C. 631-645). 11. Educational television broadcasting facilities (47 U.S.C. 390-397). 12. Surplus real and related personal property disposal 40 U.S.C. 484(k)). 13. George Washington University Hospital construction 76 Stat. 83, P.L. 87-400, May 31, 1962). 14. Loan service of captioned films for the leaf (42 V.S.('. 24U1-2494). 15. Residential vocational education schools (20 I'.S.C. $51). 16. Department projects under the Public Works Acceleration Act (P.L. 87-058). 17. Research projects, including cotifereimees, (onimunicatioli activities and priniate or other center grants (sees. 301, 303, 308, 624, Public health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 241, 242a, 242f, 29Th: sec. 4. Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C. 460c: sec. 3. Clean Air Act. 42 U.S.C. 1~57i~~. 18. General research support (see. 301(d), Public Health 5ervice Act, 42 U.S.C. 241). 19. Community health studies and demonstrations (Sec. 310, Public Health Act. 42 U.S.C. 247a). 20. Mental health demonstrations and administrative studies Sec. 303(a) (2), Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 242a). 21. Migratory workers health services (see. 310. Public Health Service Act, 76 Stat. 592, P.L. 87-692, Sept. 25. 1962). 22. Intensive vaccination projects (sec. 317, Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 247b). 23. Tuberculosis and venereal disease control I)ro.jects ) current a lpr)pria tioti Act, P.L. 88-605). 24. Air pollution demonstration and survey projects an1 control Iro~ramns (sees. 3 and 4. Clean Air Act. 42 USC'. 1857b. lS5Tcl. PAGENO="0820" 1642 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION A~D~NTS 25. Water pollution demonstration grants (sec. 4(a)(2), Federal Water Pol- lution Control Act, 33 U.S.C. 406c). 26. health research training projects and fellowship grauts (sees.. 301, 433, Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 241, 289c). 27. Categorical (heart, cancer, air pollution, etc.) grants for training,, trainee- ships or fellowships (secs. 303, 433, etc., Public Health Service Act, 42' U.s.c. 242a. 259c. etc. sec. 3. Clean Air Act. 42 U.S.C. 1857; sec. 4, Federal Water Pol- lution Control Act. 33 U.S.C. 466c). 28. Advanced professional nurse traineeships, improvement in nurse training and partial reimbursement to diploma schools of nursing (sees. 805, 806~ 821, Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 296d, 296e. 297). 29. Grants to institutions for traineeships for professional public health per- onnel (sec. 306. Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 242d). 30. Grants to schools for specialized training in public health (see. 30~, Pub- lic Health Service Act, 242g). 31. Grants for special vocational rehabilitation projects (sec. 4, Vocational Rehabilitation Act. 29 U.S.C. 34). 32. Experimental, pilot or Temonstration projects to promote the objectives of title I. IV. X. XIV. or XVI of the Social Security Act (see. 1115, Social Security Act. 42 U.S.C. 1315). ?~3. Social security and welfare cooperative research or demonstration proj- ects (sec. 1110. Social Security Act. 42 U.S.C. 1310). 34. Child welfare research, training or demonstration projects (see. 526, So' cml Security Act. 42 U.S.C. 726). 35. Re~eareh projects relating to maternal and child health services and crip' pled children's services (see. 532. Social Security Act. 42 U.S.C. 729a). 36. Maternal and child health special project grants to institutions of higher Iearninr (see. 502(h). Social Seciu.ity Act. 42 U.S.C. 702(h). 37. Maternity and infant cnre special project grants to local health agencies (see. 531. Social Security Act,42 IJ.S.C. 726). 38. Siecial pr~ject grants to institutions of higher learning for crippled chil- dren'~ ~ervie~ (see. 512(b). Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 712(b). 30. Pemoii~tratiOfl and evaluation projects and training of personnel in the field of juvenile delinquency (Juvenile Delinquency and Youth Offenses Control Act of 1961 (42 U.S.C. 2541. et. seq.)). 40. Cooperative educational research (20 U.S.C. 331-332). 41. Language research (title VI, National Defense Education Act, 20 U.s.c. 512). 42. Research in new educational media (title VII, National Defense Education Act. 20 U.S.C. 541-542). 43 Research, training, and demonstration projects under Vocational Educa- tion Act of 1963 (sec.4(c).20 U.S.C. 35c(cfl. 44. Grants for research and demonstration projects in education of handi- capped children (20 U.S.C. 618). 45. Training grants for welfare personnel (sec. 705, Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 906). 46. AllowanceS to institUtionS training graduate fellows or other trainees (title IV. National Defense Education Act, 20 U.S.C. 461-465: sec. 4. VocatIonal Rehabilitation Act. 29 U.S.C. 34: sees. 301. 433. etc., Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 241. 280(c). etc.: see. 3. Clean Air Act. 42 U.S.C. 1857b; sec. 4, Fed- eral Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C. 466c). 47. Grants for teaching and the training of teachers for the education of handi- capped children (20 U.S.C. 611-617). 48. Training persons in the use of films for the deaf (42 U.S.C. 2493(b) (4)). 49. Training for teachers of the deaf (20 U.S.C. 671-676). 50. Research In the use of educational and training films for the deaf (42 U.S.C. 2493(a)). si. Operation and maintenance of schools In Federally-affected areas (20 U.S.C. 236-244). 52. Grants for teacher training and employment of specialists in desegrega- tion problems (sec 405, Civil Rights Act of 1964, P.L. 88-352). 53. Issuance to agencies or organizations of rent-free permits for operation, on Federal property In the custody of the Department, of vending stands for the blind, credit unions. Federal employee associations, etc. (Randolph-Sheppard `Vending Stand Act. 20 U.S.C. i07-107f; 45 CFR Part 20; sec. 2~, Federal Credit ~iJnion Act, 12 U.S.C. 1770; etc.) PAGENO="0821" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1643 54. Higher education student loan program (title II. National Defense Edu- cation Act, U_S.C. 421-429). 55. Health professions school student loan program title VII, Part C, Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 294; sec. 822-828, Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 297 a-g). 56. Land-grant college aid (7 U.S.C. 301-329). 57. Language and area centers (title VI, National Defense Education Act, 20 U.S.C. 511-513). 58. American Printing House for the Blind (20 U.S.C. 101-105). 59. Future Farmers of America (36 U.S.C. 271-291) and similar programs. 60. Science Clubs (20 U.S.C. 2 (note)). 61. Howard University (20 U.S.C. 121-131). 62. Gallaudet College 31 D.C. Code. Ch. 10). 63. Hawaii leprosy payments (sec. 331, Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 255). 64. Grants to schools of public health for provision of comprehensive train- ing and specialized services and assistance (sec. 314(c), Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 246(c)). 65. Grants to agencies and organizations under Cuban Refugee program (22 U.S.C. 2(101(b) (4)). 66. Grants for construction of hospitals serving Indians (P.L. 85-151, 42 U.S.C. 2005). 67. Indian Sanitation Facilities (P.L. 86-121, 42 U.S.C. 2004a). 68. Areawide planning of health facilities (sec. 318, Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 247c). 69. Training institutes under sec. 511 of the National Defense Education Act of 1958, as amended (20 U.S.C. 491) and under title XI of such Act as added by P.L. 88-665 (20 U.S.C. 591-592). Part 2. State-administered continving programs. 1. Grants to States for control of venereal disease, tuberculosis, and for public health services (heart, cancer, mental health, radiological health, etc.) (sec. 314, Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 246), and current appropriation act). 2. Grants to States for water pollution control (sec. 5, Federal Water Pollu- tion Control Act, 33 U.S.C. 466d). 3. Grants to States for vocational rehabilitation services (sec. 2, Vocational Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. 32). 4. Grants to States for projects to extend and improve vocational rehabilita- tion services (sec. 3, Vocational Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. 33). 5. Designation of State licensing agency for blind operators of vending stands (Randolph-Sheppard Vending Stand Act, 20 U.S.C. 107-107f). 6. Grants to States for old-age assistance and medical assistance for the aged (title I, Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 301-306). 7. Grants to States for aid and services to needy families with children (title IV, Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 601-609). S. Grants to States for aid to the blind (title X, Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 1201-1206). 9. Grants to States for aid to the permanently and totally disabled (title XIV, Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 1351-1355). 10. Grants to States for aid to the aged, blind or disabled or for such aid and medical assistance for the aged (title XVI, Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 1381- 1385). 11. Grants to States for maternal and child health services (title V, part 1, Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 701-705). 12. Grants to States for services for crippled children (title V, part 2, Social Security Act. 42 U.S.C. 711-715). 13. Grants to States for special projects for maternity and infant care (see. 531, Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 720). 14. Grants to States for child welfare services (title V, part 3, Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 721-725, 727, 728). 15. Grants to States for public library services and construction (20 U.S.C. sec. 351-358: P.L. 88-269). 16. Grants to States for strengthening science, mathematics, and modern for- eign language instruction (title III, National Defense Education Act, 20 U.S.C. 441-444). 17. Grants to States for guidance, counseling and testing of students (title V-A, National Defense Education Act, 20 U.S.C. 481-484). PAGENO="0822" 1644 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 18. Grants to States for educational statistics services (sec. 1009, National Defense Education Act, 20 U.S.C. 589). 19. Surplus personal property disposal donations for health and educational purposes through State agencies (40 U.S.C. 484(j)). 20. Grants to States for hospital and medical facilities (title VI, Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 291-291z). 21. Grants to States for community mental health centers construction (Com- munity Mental Health Centers Act. 42 U.S.C. 2681-2088). 22. Grants to States for vocational education (Smith-Hughes Act, 20 U.S.C. 11-15. 10-28; George-Barden Act, 20 U.S.C. 15i-15q, lSaa-lSjj, l5aaa-l5ggg; Supplementary Acts. 20 U.S.C. 30-34). 23. Grants to States for mental retardation facilities (Part C, Mental Re- tardation Facilities Constructicn Act. 42 U.S.C. 2671-2677). 24. Arrangements with State vocational education agencies for training under the Area Redevelopment Act and the Manpower Development and Training Act of 1962 (42 U.S.C. 2513(c), 2001, 2002). 25. Grants to States for comprehensive planning for mental retardation (title XVII. Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 1391-1394). [P.R. Doe. 64-12530 : Filed. Dcc. 3. 1064; 4 :23 p.m.] AFTHORITY FOR THE 1966 SCHOOL DESEGREGATION GUIDELINES I Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 requires the absence of discrimination against persons on the ground of race as a condition for the receipt of Federal financial assistance. Section 601 of the Act states: No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. Section 602 of the Act directs each department which extends Federal assist- ance to issue regulations to carry out the provisions of Section 601. Section 602 of the Act states in part: Each Federal department and agency which is empowered to extend Federal financial assistance to any program or activity, by way of grant. loan, or contract other than a contract of insurance or guaranty, is author- ized and directed to effectuate the provisions of Section 601 with respect to such l)Iograrn or activity by issuing rules, regulations, or orders of general applicability which shall be consistent with achievement of the objectives of the statute authorizing the financial assistance iii connection with which the action is taken. No such rule, regulation, or order shall become effective unless and until approved by the President As required by Section 002. tIle 1)epartment of Health, Education, and Welfare has issued its Regulation. It was approved by the President on December 3, 1964. and on December 4, 16(34. published in the Federal Register. (29 Federal Register 16298; 45 C.F.R., Subtitle A. part SO) Section 80.4 of that Regulation provides that recipients of Federal assistance shall submit an assurance that its program will be conducted without dis- crimination based on race. Section 80.4(a) states in part: (a) General. (1) Every application for Federal financial assistance to carry out a program to which this part applies and every application for Federal fiuiai)cial assistance to provide a facility shall, as a condition to its approval and the extension of any Federal financial assistance pur- suant to the application, contain or he accompanied by an assurance that the program will he conducted or the facility operated in compliance with all requirements imposed by or pursuant to this Regulation. Under this provision, applicants can qualify for Federal financial assistance only if all racial discrimination in their programs is eliminated. Under the Regulation, however, an exception is made for elementary and secondary school systems because of the special problems in desegregation which they present. They may qualify for Federal assistance if they submit to the U.S. Commissioner of Education a plan for desegregation which the Commis- sioner determines to he adequate to accomplish the purpose of Title VI. The relevant part of the Regulation Section 80.4(c) ) states: PAGENO="0823" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1645 (c) Elementary and $econdary school$. The requirements of paragraph (a) . . . of this section with respect to any elementary or secondary school or school system shall be deemed to be satisfied if such school or school system . . . (2) submits a plan for the desegregation of such school or school system which the Commissioner of Education deteraiines is adequate to accomplish the purposes of the Act and this Regulation and provides reasonable assurance that it will carry out such plan; In order to inform school officials of the standards which a desegregation plan must meet in order to be determined adequate by the Commissioner, the Commissioner has issued school desegregation guidelines. The first guidelines. (General Statement of Policies under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1064 Respecting Desegregation of Elementary and Secondary ~4choo1s) were issued in April 1965. Revised guidelines were issued in March 19d6 (Revised State- ment of Policies for School Desegregation I'lans under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1064). The standards for desegregation plans stated in the guidelines follow closely the provisions of Federal court decisions ordering the desegregation of separate schools maintained for Negro and white children. II Many persons, including some school superintendents and school board ipem- bers, have an erroneous view of the connection between the requirement of Title VI, as explained in the guidelines, and the law as stated in the school desegrega- tion cases decided by the Federal courts. These persons argue that Title VI, by its terms, applies only to discrimination, but not to desegregation, which, ac- cording to this view, is a different matter. Accordingly they insist that they may properly maintain separate schools for whites an(l Negroes, with all-white and all-Negro faculties, as long as any requests by Negro children for admission to a white school are granted. They niaintaiii that any provisions of the guidelines ~vhich require further desegregation a ic a usurpation of power by the Office of Education, These persons also argue that the guidelines are improper because they iiiitke nO pi'ovisioii for the particula r ` uditit as ii ad ~iiiiiuiis which may be found in individual school districts. They believe that school ollicials should be able to shape their desegregation idans so as to be iiiore in accord with the sen- tiinents of their community. These views, which are incorrect, have been the source of much of the mis- understanding about the propriety of the guidelines, and the responsibility of every school system to establish one systeili of schools for all its children. III Title VI was prol)osed to the Congress as part of the Civil Rights Act because Federally supported programs and activities, such as schools and hospitals, w-ere still being run on a segregated basis, in defiance of the Suprcnic Court holding that `separate hut equal" facilities were unconstitutional. In the debates on Title VI iii both the House and Senate, the chief spokesmen for Title VI made it clear that Title VI applied to programs and activities which were unconstitu- tionally segregated. In tile House debate on February 7. 1904, Representative Celler, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, and the manager of the bill in the house stated: In general, it seenis rather anomalous that the Federal Government should aid and abet discrimination on the basis if lace, ecilor or national origin by granting money and other kinds of tinancial aid. It simias i'ather shocking, moreover, that while we have Ofl the one hand the 14th ~iniemaliiient. which is supposed to do away with discrimination since it provides for equal Pro- tection of the law's, on the other hand, we have the Federal Government aiding and abetting those who persist in practicing racial discrimimination. It is for these reasons that we bring forth title VI. The enactment of title VI. w-ill serve to override specific provisions of law which contemplate Federal assistance to racially segregated institutions. (110 Congressional Record. Part 2, 2407) On April 7, 1904. Senator Pastore. principal spokesman in the Senate for Title VI, said much the same thing in the Senate debate. Speaking of congressional debate, I should now like to consider a number of objections which have been offered to title VI. PAGENO="0824" 1646 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS In the House. a concerted attack was made on title VI as "punitive" or "vindictive.' These charges are undeserved. These characterizations ap- pear to result from the belief that title VI is intended to deny the South tiui~ heiietit of social-welfare programs-that it would punish entire States for any act of discrimination committed within them. This argument merely befogs time issues. It ignores both the purposes of title VI and all of the limitations that have carefully been written into its langauge. As is clear, the l)lIrlose of title VI is to make sure that funds of the United Stites are not used to support racial discrimination. In many instances, the practices of segregation and discrimination, which title VI seeks to end, are unconstitutional. `l'his is clearly so wherever Federal funds go to a State agency which en- gages in racial discrimination. It may also he so where Federal funds go to support private, segregated institutions, as the decision in the Simkins case teaches. In all cases, racial discrimination is contrary to the national lolicy and to the moral sensibilities of the people of this Nation. Thus, title VI is simply designed to insure that Federal funds are spent in accordance with the Constitution and our public policy. (110 Congressional Record, Part (i, 7o~;2l Against this background, it is clear that it would he a gross violation of the Congressional intent to interpret Title VI to permit practices declared uncon- stitutional by the United States courts. IV The landniark school desegregation case. Brown v. Board of Educatio'n 347 CS. 4'~ lft'i4 ) o'~ralilishecl the principle that the mainteiman('e of separate schools for children of different races is unconstitutional. After discussing the importance of education tWiy and the role of state an(l local government in providing education. the court reached the question of whether or not segrega- tion of children on the basis of race deprived the minority group children of equal educational opportunities. The court concluded that it did, stating To separate [Negro grade and high school children] from others of similar age anti qualifications solely because of their race generates a feeling of inferiority as P their status in the commuuiiity that may affect their hearts an(l minds in a way unlikely ever to he undone We conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of "separate but equal" has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. (34T U.S. at pages 494-495) The Supreme Court then heard further arguments on the implementation of its decision and in its second opinion, rnie year later, left no doubt that it equated segregation in schools with discrimination. The court stated that the first Brown decision declared: the fundamental principle that racial discrimination in public edu- cation is unconstitutional . . . All provisions of Federal, State, or local law ro~iiiring or permitting such discrimination must yield to this principle. (349 U.S. at page 298) The court held that there must be a prompt start in the elimination of separate S(hOOlS an(l that the burden of justifying any delays in complying with the law was upon the school system. These principles have been reaffirmed in a number of reeent Federal court decisions. For example. in a January 1966 decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit concerning the Jackson, Mississippi school sys- tem. (Sjnqlcton v. Jackson ltvnicipal ~8c1iool District, 355 F. 2d 865, 869 (C.A. 5th. Jan. 26. 1966)1. the Court stated: The Constitution forbids unconstitutional state action in the form of segregated facilities, including segregated public schools. School authorities, therefore, are under the constitutional compulsion of furnishing a single integrated school system. Administrative problems may justify an orderly transitionary period during which the system may be desegregated several grades at a time This has been the law since Brawn v. Board of Education. Misunderstand- ing of this principle is perhaps due to the popularity of an over-simplified dictum that the Constitution "does not require integration." (Citation omitted) PAGENO="0825" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATIOX AMENDMENTS 1647 And in Kemp v. BeaSl(y. ~i52 F. 2(1 14,21 (CA. Sth, 1965), a case concern- ing the desegregation of the El I)orado, Arkansas schools, the schol board argued in support of its plan that "as long as the Negro is not required to attend the Negro school, his constitutioiial rights have nor been violated." The Court stated that it could not "accept the position advanced by the Board," pointing out that it was "logically inconsistent with Drown and subsequent decisional law on this subject." A similar idea is stated in Brown v. County Scllool Board of Frederick County, Virginia. 245 F. Supp, 549, 560 (W.D. Va., 1963) The ideal to which a free(1om of choice plan must ultimately aspire, as well as any other desegregation plan, is that school boards ~vill operate "schools," not "Negro schools" or "white schools." The recent Federal decisions also show that the courts are looking with in- creasing disfavor on delay in school desegregation. In L'radlc,j V. ,Scliooi Board of City of J?ieliinonil, :182 U.S. 1O~l, 103 (1965) the Supreme Coui't declared that: more than a decade has passed since we directed desegregation of pul)liC school facilities "~vith all deliberate speed." 1)elays in desegregation of school systems are no longer tolerable. (Citation omitted) And in an earlier opinion (June 22, 1965) in the Jackson, ]Iis~1~~ippj case (348 F. 2d 729 (CA. 5th, 1063)). the Fifth Circuit stated: The time has come for footdragging public school hoards to move with celerity toward desegregation. Since May 17. 1954. public school boards throughout the counti'y have known that they must desegregate their schools. And as the law- moved with rising tempo to meet changing conditions, school boards might have foreseen that further delays would pile up rather than spread their nettlesome problems. This Court has urged shool authorities to grasp tile nettle now. We have put them on notice that, "the rule has become: the later the start, the shorter the time allowed for transition. (Footnotes omitted) (348 F. 2d at page 730) In the second Brown decision in 1955. the Supreme Court made it clear that Federal district courts may take local problems and conditions into account when framing school desegregation decrees, except that opposition to desegrega- tion may not be a ground for delay. The Court declared: But it should go without saying that the vitality of these constitutional principles cannot be allowed to yield simply because of disagreement with them. (349 U.S. at page 300) The principle has been reaffirmed by the Federal courts, most recently in the 1965 El Dorado, Arl~'ansa.s and Jackson, Mississippi cases. In the El Dorado case the court stated: The first basic issue to be determined is whether or not the plan is moving forward with appropriate speed. We feel it is not. It is our opinion that the Board has not affirmatively performed its duty to provide a system of non-segregated schools as required by the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment with "good faith compliance at the eai'liest prac- ticable date" and w-ith "all deliberate speed" as required by the second Brown decision. The Supreme Court in refusing to countenance delay in the Little Rock, Arkansas school desegregation matter because of tension, bedlam, chaos, and turmoil in the schools, in Cooper v. Aaron over seven years ago used the following significant language: * * * * * Of course, in many locations obedience to the duty of de- segregation would require immediate general admission of Negro chil- dren, otherwise qualified as students for their appropriate classes, at particular schools. On the other hand, a District Court. after analysis of the relevant factors (s~-hich of course, excludes hostility to racial desegregation) might conclude that justification existed for not re- quiring the present nonsegregated admission of all qualified Negro children. In such circumstances, however, the courts should scrutinize the program of the school authorities to make sure that they had de- veloped arrangements pointed toward the earliest practicable comple- tion of desegregation, and had taken appropriate steps to put their program into effective operation. It was made plain that deiai, of an?, guise in order to deny the constitutional rights of Negro children could not be countenanced and that only a pronipt start, diligently and earn~- estly pursued, to eliminate racial segregation from the public schools PAGENO="0826" 164S ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDL'CATION AMENDMENTS eoul(T constitute gooi faith compliance. (Emphasis added by Eighth Circuit citation omitted) ~32~ F. 2d at page 19.) The recent deeision.~ cited above, which develop the principles of the 1954 and l9oo Brown decisions, show that the courts consider that the maintenance of separate schools for Negroes is discriminatory. Merely admitting to white schools those Negroes who may request to attend them does not change the separate character of schools maintained primarily for Negroes and whites. Thei~e principles are developed further in the decisions cited below in the dis- cussion of faculty desegregation and effectiveness of free choice plans. V With regard to faculty desegregation, the 1966 guidelines state that the racial composition of faculties must be considered in determining whether students are subject to discrimination. and require that except to the extent necessary to correct past discriminatory assignments, race may not be a factor in teacher assignments, that qualified teachers may not be dismissed on the basis of race, and that school systems must make significant progress in 1966-67 in eliminating past discriminatory assignments. Section 181.13 provides as follows: 181.13 Faculty and Staff (a) Desegregation of Staff. The racial composition of the professional staff of a school system, and of the schools in the system, must be considered in determining whether students are subjected to discrimination in educa- tional lrograms. Each school system is responsible for correcting the effects of all past discriminatory practices in the assignment of teachers and other professional staff. (b) ~Vew Assignnients. Race. color, or national origin may not be a factor in the hiring or assignment to schools or within schools of teachers and other professional staff, including student teachers and staff serving two or more schools. except to correct the effects of past discriminatory assignments. (c) Dismissals. Teachers and other professional staff may not be dis- missed, demoted. or passed over for retention, promotion, or rehiring, on the ground of race. color, or national origin. In any instance where one or more teachers or other professional staff members are to be displaced as a result of desegregation, no staff vacancy in the school system may be filled through recruitment from outside the system unless the school offi- cials can show that no such displaced staff member is qualified to fill the vacancy. If as a result of desegregation, there is to be a reduction in the total professional staff of the school system, the qualifications of all staff members in the system must be evaluated in selecting the staff members to be released. (dl Past Assignments. The pattern of assignment of teachers and other professional staff among the various schools of a system may not he such that schools are identifiable as intended for students of a particular race, color, or national origin, or such that teachers or other professional staff of a particular race are concentrated in those schools where all, or the ma- ~ority of. tlii stiideiits are of that race. Each school system has a positive duty to make staff assignments and reassignments necessary to elinilnate past discriminatory assignment patterns. Staff desegregation for the 1966- 07 school year must include significant progress beyond what was accom- p1 ished fir t lie I 5~-00 senool year in the desegregation of teachers assigned to schools on a regular full-time basis. Patterns of staff assignment to initiate staff desegregation might include, for example: (1) Some desegre- cation of professional staff in each school in the system. (2) the assign- rnent of a significant portion of the professional staff of each race to particu- lar schools in the system where their race is a minority and where special staff ti-aininc programs are established to help with the process of staff desegregation. (3) the assignment of a significant portion of the staff on a desegregated basis to those schools in which the student body is desegre- gated. (4 the reassignment of the staff of schools being closed to other schools in the system where their race is a minority, or (5) an alternative pattern of assignment which will make comparable progress in bringing al)OUt staff desegregation successfully. Obviously, it is impossible to desegregate schools without desegregating teach- ers. In Bradley v. Board of Education of City of Richmond, 382 U.S. 103 (1965) PAGENO="0827" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1649 and Rogers v. Paul, 382 U.S. 198 (19435) (Ft. Smith. Ark.), both recent cases in which the lower courts had refused to permit inquiry into the question of teacher assignments by race, the Supreme Court ruled that Negro children have a right to bring before the court charges of discriminatory staff assignments. It re- manded both cases to the trial courts for prompt evidentiary hearings on the issue of teacher segregation. In the Rich iuond case the Supreme Court declared: There is no merit to the suggestion that the relation between faculty alloca- tion on an alleged racial basis and the adequacy of desegregation plans is- entirely speculative. (382 U.S. at page 105) And in the Fort Smith case the Supreme Court declared Two theories would give students not yet in desegregated grades sufficient interest to challenge racial allocation of faculty: (1) that racial allocation of faculty denies them equality of educational opportunity without regard to segregation of pupils; and (2) that it renders inadequate an otherwise constitutional pupil desegregation plan soon to be applied to their grades. See Bradley v. $chool Board, su;pra. Petitioners plainly had standing to challenge racial allocation of faculty under the first theory and thus they were improperly denied a hearing on this issue. (382 U.S. at page 200) The Courts of Appeals have also ruled on teacher desegregation. In the El Dorado case, the Eighth Circuit declared: The Court recognizes the validity of the plaintiffs' complaint regarding the Board's failure to integrate the teaching staff. Such discrimination is proscribed by Brown and also the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the regula- tions promulgated thereunder. . . . The District Court retains jurisdiction of this matter and with its equity powers may issue any order or orders necessary to bring into being a reasonable nondiscriminatory policy of em- ployme~t of teachers without regard to race. (352 F. 2d at pages 22-23) Similarly in the Jackson, Mississippi case the Fifth circuit held that it was essential that the Jackson desegregation plan: provide an adequate start toward elimination of race as a basis for the employment and allocation of teachers, administrators, and other per- sonnel. (335 F. 2d at 870) The I )istrict ( `nurts likewise have ruled on teacher desegregation. In Can- v. Montgomery County Board of Education, Civil Action No. 2072-N (M.D. Ala., March 22. 1966) the court directed the Montgomery County. Alabama school system to execute a desegregation plan in which the teacher desegregation provi- sions closely follow the 1966 guidelines in several respects. The school system was ordered to report to the Court by June 15 "the planned assignments of pro- fessional staff to each school for the next school year by race and grade, or \viien appropriate, by subject taught or position held . . ." The desegregation ilan ordei'ed by the Court further provided: Race or color will henceforth not be a factor in the hiring, assignment. re~ assignment, promotion, demotion, or dismissal of teachers and other prefes- sional staff, with the exception that assignments shall be iliade in order to eliminate the effects of past discriiiiiiiat ion. Teaeelis l)riiicilaI s, and staff members will he assigned to schools so that the faculty and staff is not com- posed of members of one race. In the re(l'uitillcnt iiid eniployiaent f tea (hels ami ther pr fessional per- soiinel. all apiliants or other pr sle(tive enlpl)yees ~viIl he infrined that Montgoiiierv County operates a raialiv illtegrate(l shol svsteii and that members of its staff are subject to assiguiient- in the best interest of the system auth without regard to the mace am color of the particular eiiiployee. The Superintendent of Schools and his staff will take affirmative steps to solicit and encourage teachers presently employed to accept transfers to schools in which the majority of the faculty muiembers are of a race different from that of the teacher to be transferred Similar orders omi faculty desegregation were issued in March 1966 in the Mason and Bullock County, Alabama sch 1 desegregation cases. The fact that a district has a high proportion of Negroes has not deterred courts from ordering faculty desegregatimi. lii .Jamuuiarv. 1(6. the I )istrict Court issued its decision 111 Wiql / v. (`aunti~ `5e1 aol Raqil of (jrecn~if/c County. fir- ginia. Civil Aitin N 4263 ED. Va.. .Ini. 27 1966) Gi'ensvjlle is a Southside. Virginia school (listlil with 27(4) Negro and 18(4) white students. The distl'i(t's desegregation pin n had been a c epted 1 y the I S. Comi in issioner of Education, but the court found that the phi's faculty desegregation provision was ``too lim- PAGENO="0828" 1650 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDIJCATION AMENDMENTS ited." Because the Primary responsibility for desegregating staff rests with the school board, the Court afforded the school board an opportunity to make its own proposal to the Court on faculty desegregation. But the Court admonished the 5(1101 hoard that it niust make definite and substantial progress. The Court stated Several principles must be observed by the board. Token assignments will not suffice. The elimination of a racial basis for the employment and assign- ment of staff must be achieved at the earliest practicable date. The plan must contain well (lefihlsl procedures which will be put into effect on definite dates. The beard will be allowed ninety days to submit amendments to its plan dealing with staff employment a mid assignineiit practices. The district courts have also emphasized recently the important role that teacher desegregation plays in making free choice plans effective. For example in icier v. (ount~/ ,~c1ioo! Board of Augusta Count1i, Virginia, 249 F. Supp 239, 245-241; Wi). Va., Jon. 5. 1006) the court stated The defendants, by the segregation of teachers, continue to maintain three (`learly-~lelineatcd Negro sehoels. "[T]he presence of all Negro teachers in a ochool attendod solely ha- Negro pupils in the past denotes that school a `colored school' just as certainly as if the words were printed across its en- trance in six inch letters.' Freedom of choice, in other words, does not mean a choice between a clearly delineated "Negro school" having an all-Negro faculty and staff and a "white school" (with all-white faculty and staff). School authorities who have heretofore operated dual school systems for Negroes and w-hites must assume the duty °f eliminating the effects of dualism before a freedom of choice plan can be superimaposed upon the pre-existing situation and ap- proved as a final plan of leseirregation. It' i~ not enough to open the previ- )usly all-white school to Negro students who desire to go there while all- Negro schools continue to be maintained as such. Inevitably, Negro children will be er.coura~el to remain in "their school," built for Negroes and main- tained for Negroes with all-Negro tea°hers and administrative personnel. This encouragement may he subtle hut it is none the less discriminatory. The duty rests w-ith the School Board to overcome the discrimination of the past and the long estahlished image of the "Negro school" can be overcome under freedom of choice only by the presence of an integrated faculty. (Citation omitted I. Some have argued that Section 604 of the Civil Rights Act of 1984 bars the Office of Education from taking any action with regard to teacher desegregation. Section 604 provides: Nothing contained in this title shall he construed to authorize action under this title by any department or agency with respect to any employment prac- tice of any employer, employment agency, or labor organization except where a primary objective of the Federal financial assistance is to provide employ- nient. The Senate added Section 604 to the Act to satisfy the objection, stated in the House Minority Report (House Report No. 914. 55th Congress, First Session, p. 89). that under section 601. a person, such as a farmer or a hanker, could be barred from Federal agricultural or banking programs if he hired only persons of one particular race. It had not been the purpose of Title `VI to reach discrim- ination against persons w-ho are not the intended beneficiaries of a particular Federal assistance program. The Attorney General explained the administra- tion's position in a letter. dated April 29. 1964, to Senator Cooper, w-hich the Sen- ator inserted in the Congressional Record. Question. Would section 602 cover an employer who receives funds under a Federal program, and who discriminates in his employment practice? Answer. Generally, no. Title VI is limited in application to instances of discrimination against the beneficiaries of Federal assistance programs, as the language of section 601 clearly indicates. Where, however, employees are the intended beneficiaries of a program, title VI would apply. Thus, for example, creation of job opportunities is one of the major purposes of the accelerated public works program. Hence construction employees would be PAGENO="0829" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1651 deemed beneficiaries of such a program, aiid section 002 would require the administering agency to take action to prohibit racial discriniinatjon against them in such a program. On the other hand, the Agricultural Adjustment Act and acreage allotment riayments under it is a conimodity program hav- ing nothing to do with fariii employment. Farm employees are not benefi- ciaries of that program, and section 002 would not authorize any action to require recipients of acreage allotments to refrain from racial discrimina- tion in employment. (110 Congressional Record, I'art 8, 10070) In order that there be no doubt about the effect of Title VI on persons who discriminate against employees who are not the intended beneficiaries of Federal programs, the Senate added section 604 to the Civil Rights Act. But in agreeing to section 604, the Senate (lid not condone discrimination against the intended beneficiaries of Federal assistance programs, just because such discrimination might be linked to an employment practice of a recipient of the Federal funds. For example, section 604 certainly would not bar the Commissioner from taking appropriate action in the case of a school district which adopted the employment practice of dismissing white teachers who refused to cliscriniinate against Negro children in their classrooms. The purpose of the Commissioner's action in such a matter would not be to protect the employment of teachers, but to protect the child, who is the intended beneficiary of Federal assistance to education, from discrimination induced by the employment practice of his teacher's employer. Usually, the beneficiaries of Federal educational assistance programs are students, although under some programs, teachers and other persons may also be beneficiaries. A common form of discrimination against heneficiai'y students is the hiring, assignment, and dismissal of their teachers on the basis of the teacher's race. For the reasons discussed above, the C nomiissiO1I(~1' has authority under Title VI to protect students who are beneficiaries ~if Federal programs in education from this form of discrimination. This conclusion is reinforced by an additional consideration. Under a canon of statutory construction, long recognized by the courts, when construing highly remedial legislation, such as Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of Th64, an excep- tion to the general purpose of an act such as section 604. should he read in ac- cordance with its particular purpose, and not in a manner which defeats the over- all purpose of the act. In the case of Title VI, that purpose, of course, is the protection of the intended beneficiaries of Federal assistance from discrimination by recipients of Federal funds. One of the main reasons for the enactment of Title VI was the failure of so many school boards and their communities to assume, at a local level, their re- sponsibility under the Constitution to desegregate their schools. It is a matter of common sense, as well as law, that schools cannot be desegregate~l without de- segregating teachers. It would be anomalous if section 604, which was added to the Act for a limited purpose, were to be construed to thwart one of the main purposes of Title VI. VI With regard to effectiveness of free choice plans, the 1901; g1mi(1(1II1(~ l)l'ovide, in effect, that in the absence of reasons to the contrary, the Cmnmjssj11p1' will accept free choice pans for 1960-07. But if such plans are not eff(('tjvp the Com- missioner may require school officials to take such action as may be necessary to make the plans effective, or may require the adoption of a different type of plan. The relevant Section provides: 1S1.i4 Requirements for Effectiveness of Free Choice Plans A free choice plan tends to place the burden of desegregation on Negro or other minority group students and their parents. Even when school authori- ties undertake good faith efforts to assure its fair operation, the very nature of a free choice plan and the effect of longstanding comniunity attitudes often tend to preclude or inhibit the exercise of a truly free choice by or for minority group students. For these reasons, the Commissioner will scrutinize with special care the operation of voluntary plans of desegregation in school systems which have adopted free choice plans. In determining whether a free choice plan is operating fairly and effectively, so as to materially further the orderly achievement of desegregation the Com- missioner will take into account such factors as community Support for the plan, the efforts of the school system to eliminate the identiflal)ijity of schools PAGENO="0830" 16:52 I:LEMI:NT,~RY AND SECONDARY EDFCATIOX AMENDMENTS on the basis of race. color, or national origin by virtue of the composition of staff or other fa1 ors. and the prouress actually made in eliminating past dis- crinililatlon and segregation. `Flie siiirie in st sui~taiitia1 indication as to whether a free choice l)lafl is actually working to eI~ tuitiate the dual school structure is the extent to which Negro or cthcr minority ~rreup students have in fact transferred from segre- rated schools. Titus. when substantial desegregation actually occurs under a free `hoi'c plan. there i~ strong evidence that the plan is operating effectively and fairly, and is currently acceptable as a means of meeting legal requirements. Conversely, where a free choice plan results in little or no actual desegregation, or where. havinz already produced some degree of desegregation, it does not re~ult in substantial progress. there is reason to believe that the plan is not operating effectively and may not he an appropriate or acceptable method of meetinr constitutional and statutory requirements. As a general matter. for the 1966-67 school year the Commissioner will, in the absence of other evidence to the contrary, assume that a free choice plan is a viable and effe('tive means of completing initial stages of desegregation in school systems in which a substantial percentage of the students have in fact been transferred from segregated schools. Where a small degree of desegre- gation has been achieved and, on the basis of the free choice registration held in the spriur f IPdft it appears that there will not he a substantial increase in desegregation for the lf)dd-67 school year. the Commissioner will review the working of the plan and will normally require school officials to take additional actions as a prerequisite to continued use of a free choice plan, even as an interim device. In districts with a sizable percentage of Negro or other minority group stu- dents. the Commissioner will, in general. be guided by the following criteria in s('helnling free choice plans for review' (1) If a significant percentare of the students. such as 8 percent or 9 percent. transferi'ed from segregated schools for the 1965-66 school year, total transfers on the order of at least twice that percentage would normally ic expected. (2 If a smaller percentage of the students, such as 4 percent or 5 per- cent. transferred from segregated schools for the 1965-66 school year. a substaiitial increase in transfers would normally be expected, such as would bring the total to at least triple the percentage for the 1965-66 school year. (~) If a lower percentage of students transferred for the 1965-66 school year. then the rate of increase in total transfers for the 1966-67 school year would normally he expected to be proportionately greater than under (2) above. (4~ If no students transferred from segregated schools under a free choice plan for the 1965-66 school year. then a very substantial start w'ould normally be expected. to enable such a school system to catch up as quickly as possible with systems which started earlier. If a school sys- teni in these circumstances is unable to make such a start for the 1966-67 school year under a free choice plan. it will normally be required to adopt a different type of plan. Where there is substantial deviation from these expectations, and the Commissioner concludes. on the basis of the choices actually made and other available evidence, that the plan is not operating fairly, or is not effective to meet constitutional and statutory requirements, he will require the school system to take a additional steps to further desegregation. Such additional steps may include, for example, reopening of the choice period, additional meetings with parents and civic groups, further arrange- nmemit~ with State or local officials to limit opportunities for intimidation, and other further community preparation. Where schools are still identifi- able on the ba~is of staff composition as intended for students of a par- ticular race, color. or national origin, such steps must in any such case include substaiIti~il further changes in staffing patterns to eliminate such iden t ifi a lii lit y. If the Commissioner concludes that such steps would he ineffective, or if they fail to remedy the defects in the operation of any free choice plan, he may require the school systefl1 to adopt a different type of desegrega- tion plan. PAGENO="0831" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDL~CATION AMENDMENTS 1653 Obviously, a school system which has adopted a free choice desegregation plan, but which is making little or no progress in tile elimination of its dual school sys- tem, is not satisfying its constitutional obligation, as defined by the decisions of the Federal courts, to desegregate its schools. Just as obviously, the Commis- sioiier would not be satisfying his obligation under Title VI and the Regulation if he were to determine that such a plan is adequate to carry out the purposes of Title VI. In several opinions, the courts have exl)ress(d the vicv: that iii some circumstance, free choice plans may not be an effective means of desegregating schools. The courts have stated that if experience shows that a plan is ineffec- tive, the plan should be modified to correct w'hatever problems may exist. Thus lii the El Dora do case, the court stated Even though the "freedom of choice'S has been recognized by the H.E.W. regulations as one method of achieving integi'ation and also has been recog- nized and approved by some court decisions, mt iS still Why in the experi- mental stage and it has not yet been demonstrated that such a method will fully implement the decision of Brown and subsequent cases and the legisla- tive declaration of [Section 601] of the Civil Rights Act of 1fib4. Both (leCi- sional and statutory law positively and affirmatively call for school districts set upon a racially nondiscriminatory basis. The "freedom of choice" plan is treated in the Bradley dissent. supra. as "only an interim measure, the adequacy of which is imknow-n." however. si mice this method could prove practical in achieving the goal of a nonsegreaated school system, it should be allowed to demonstrate its efficacy to afford the constitutional guarantees w-hich plaintiffs are entitled to as a matter of riirht. We, therefore, find that the "freedom of choice" plan is a permissible method at this stage. (352 F. 2d at pages 20-21) And in the Green srille County case, the court declared that a freedom of choice plan may he invalid. The pertinent part of the opinion states: This circuit has recognized that local authorities should lie accorded con- siderable discretion in charting a route to a constitutionally adequate school system. Freedom of choice plans are not in themselves invalid. They may, however, he invalid because the "freedom of choice" is illusory. The plan must he tested not only by the manner in which it operates to provide oppor- tunities for a desegregated education. In this respect operation under the plan may show that the transportation policy or the Capacity of the schools severely limits freedom of choice, although provisions concerning these phases are valid on their face. This plan, just as the Richmond plan approved in Bradley, is subject to review and modification in the light of its operation. It is clear therefore that the effectiveness of a free choice plan must he con- sidered by the Commissioner in determining whether a school system is in com- pliance with Title VI. The percentages stated in tIme guidelines do not l)rovide a rigid rule for the degree of progress required of each school district. They do, how'ever, provide a guide to the Office of Education and the school district as to what. in general, might be considered reasonable progress. In this same section. there is an indication of what might be done in the event there is a substantial deviation from these expectations. VII In conclusion, the decisions of the Federal courts establish that local school officials who have in the past maintained separate schools for Negro and white children are under a constitutional compulsion to provide a single dc'segi'egated school system for all children, The responsibilities which school otfl~i~ls who are desegregating their school systems voluntarily must assume in eider to qualify for Federal assistance may not, if the purposes of Title II are to he carried out, be any less than the responsibilities imposed on school officials by the courts in recent school desegregation decisions, The guidelines were issued to inform school officials of what those responsibilities are and are in accord with those decisions. If school systems assuming a lesser degree of responsibility were per- mitted to receive Federal assistance, the purposes of Title VI would be thwarted. STATEMENT OF HAEOLD HOWE II. VS. COMMISSIONER OF EDI-cATION, DEP~T~IENT OF HEALTH, EDICATION, ANT) WELFARE Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, in 1DM, more than a decade ago, the Supremime Court declared segregated public schools to be unconstitutional. The Court conc'luded that segregated education is inherently unequal, and that "in the field of public education the doctrine of separate hut equal has no l)lace." PAGENO="0832" 1654 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDICATION AMENDMENTS In the following term the Court did not direct that the schools be desegregated forthwith. but rather with "all deliberate speed." Ten years later. many schools were still being operated on a segregated basis. It was in this context that in July 1964 Congress enacted Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. That Title expressly requires all Federal agencies, including the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, to assure that no person be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. This law obliges the Department to withhold Federal funds from any school system that continues to maintain a segregated school. It was in order to discharge this resl)onsibility that we issued the Guidelines and estal)liShed the appropriate adniini strative machinery for enforcing them. The school desegregation guidelines were issued by the Office of Education to provide an objective basis for carrying out our obligations under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Not only did local school districts request consistent guides to assist them in undertaking their obligations, but the Office of Educa- non required a policy statement to assist in administration of a large program. The fundamental prillcil)les of the guidelines are based upon the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and upon court decisions. The courts have said, for example: that faculty desegregation is a iiecessary element of school desegregation; that free- choice plans iliust work fairly and that school boards have an obligation to work athiiniitively to achieve desegregation. The guidelines articulate the basic principles already enunciated by the courts and the way they apply to the broad administrative responsibility of the Office of Education. As a brief sunullary we would call attention to the following points 1. The guidelines were developed to meet the needs of the schools for a state- ment concerlliflg their obligations under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. The primary purpose of the guideliiieS and of our administration of Title VI is to help ~cliool districts to stay in compliance so that Federal funds may flow to the benefit of school children. ~. Our own attorileys in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare and those in the Justice Department were asked to examine the guidelines prior to their issuance in March 1966 to determine whether they are consistent with Title VI. These attorneys have agreed that the guidelines are consistent with Title VI and follow the Federal Court rulings. 3. The Courts have pointed out that as long as school staffs are still assigned on a segregated basis the existence of the Negro school and the white school as separate parts of a dual school system cannot be overcome. 4. The guidelines do not mention and do not require "racial balance" or the correction of racial "imbalance." Nor have we in the administration of our obli~atioflS under Title VI sought to establish "racial balance." They deal only with ~esegregati0n plans designed tO eliminate the dual school systems for whites and Negroes. systems being operated in violation of the 1954 Supreme Court Ruling. in re~lloi1~e to 1uestlofls which have arisen over the past few months con- cerning the legality, lie piirposd'. and the operation of the 1906 School Desegre- gatioli (~uidOIhi~'~. we prepared a special statement which the Secretary of Health, Edllcdti11. and Weifare. John Gardner, sent on April 9, 1966. as a letter to C ngresslllefl and P vernors. What th" letter said was this "We have received a iiumber of inquiries about our revised school de- ~egrega1 loll guidelines, some of which reflect a misunderstanding of their purpo~P and intent. You will probably have received similar inquiries, so I think it nirlit be useful to restate the purpose, background, and meaning of the revised guidelines. *l~*(~l~ the same reason, I have asked TJ.S. Commissioner of Education Haiald howe hi and sellior members of his staff to meet with State and b ai sh 1 officials to make clear the purpose and nature of these revised uni deli nes. "The ~ and the Coi~rress have spoken clearly on the basic issues of the ~ of public schools. The Supreme Court decided that ques- tion twelve years aro. Since then Congress has plainly established in law that 1upil'~ nay ut he issiuned to schools on the basis of their race or color. `l'itle VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 expressly requires the Exe utive !~raio'h to insure that funds for federally assisted programS, in- cluding educati a. must not be used to support discrimination or segregation. PAGENO="0833" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDICATIOX AMENDMENTS 1655 ``This Department, like all other executive agencies. is required by Title VI not to use Federal funds to perpetuate racial segregation. We have found that uniform rules contained in guidelines issued by the Commissioner of Education are the best method of dealing with 1)0th the operational problems of school districts and our own responsibilities under the law. "The first school guidelines were issued in April, 19ti~, aiid they were not widely questioned. There was a widespread effort by school districts to comply. In many areas, school desegregation l)egan for the first time smoothly and without incident. In other areas. desegregation, already be- gun. progressed substantially. "From the experience under the original guidelines, we learned that effective desegregation depends on determination by local communities. The guidelines di(l not ask school districts fornierly segregated to desegre- gate overnight. They recognized that the remedy to be fashioned should take into account administrative problems. Thus, they aske(l that a sub- stantial beginning be made: and this was done. All but 300 of the iiiore than 2.000 affected school districts agreed to desegregate all 12 grades by the fall of 1906. a full year ahead of the 1967 target contemplated by the original guidelines and required by the Courts. Only 79 chose not to comply. "The legal principle, defined by the Courts. is that desegregation must progress, and that as it proceeds in a particular school district. adiiiinistrn- tive problems offer progressively less justification for delay. During 190~ and this year. the Courts repeatedly announced requirenients which hut school districts further along the road toward desegregation than (lid the original guidelines. This was a foreseeable and inevitable result, since the guidelines were of general applicability while Courts fashioned their orders on a case-by-case basis. "From the issuance of revised Court orders it became clear that school districts not operating under Court orders could and should make more progress this year toward desegregation than was required by the original guidelines. In light of this fact and of our experience with problems under free choice plans for compliance, we revised the guidelines. "One aspect of the revised guidelines about which there has been some inquiry is faculty desegregation. Courts have held that meaningful deseg- regation cannot occur so long as segregation of faculty members persists. The 19& guidelines pointed toward faculty desegregation by asking school boards to hold desegregated staff meetings and to plan further steps the ensuing year. The 1906 guidelines, following the decisions of Courts, pro- vide for desegregation of the faculty to begin. "The guidelines do not, as some have assumed. require the instantaneous desegregation of the faculty in every school building in every district. Nor do they prescribe rigid means. They provide considerable flexibility as to how a district might undertake faculty desegregation. What the guide- lines do require is that a reasonable beginning be made and that reasonable progress be achieved beyond what was achieved last year. We believe that. w-ith determination and good faith, these goals can he attained. "The second area of concern involves the percentages mcmii loned in the guidelines. Some have contended that this portion of the puidelimies iinpo~es a formula of `racial balance.' Time contention misconceives time purimose of the percentages. "The prevailing method of desegregation is w-hat is called the free choice' plan. Under such a plan, students select their schools ima.tead of being as- signed to them on a geogral)hic basis. Courts have expressly conditioned their approval of such plans on affirmative action by school boards to insure that `free choice' actually exists. It is our respoii~ibility to review such plans to insure that the choice is, in fact, free and to indicate to school clis- tricts what proce(lUres shoTild be used to assure true freedom of choice. "In seeking appropriate criteria to guide us in review of free choice plans. we have adopted the objective ciii er~i apphie(l by the Court 1mm similar situ- ations. One such criterion is the distribution of students hy race in the va- rious schools of a system after the students have mimade their (`hoic~. If substantial numbers of Negro clii lciren chose and ~() tO preva misly all -wli it e schools, tIme choice system is clearly opera timig freely. If few *r huh (Imoosu' to dO 50 ill a community where there has In cii a pact rn f ~ r'ga I P ii. the! it is appropriate that the fiee choice plo ii be m'evievce(l a mid ther liI('t ors considered to determine whether the system is operating freely. 7~ 492 GT-pt. 2-~i PAGENO="0834" id,i6 ELEMENTAllY ~XD SECONDAHY EDITCATIOX AMENDMENTS Wi~ h ni re than 00 separate districts to consider. such percentages are thus an adiiiiiiistrative guide which helps us to determine those districts requiring further liview. Such review in turn will determine whether or not i lii' frtcd~ ni of clii ice plan is in fact workin fairly. If the lurlsces if the guidelines and their relationship to the decision of lie ( curt s a id t lie 1~ivs of the C n~iress are uiuerstood. I believe cur general aIm 1115' WIll lii -lear. It is ti assist local officials to comply with the law iii a d faith and to enable us to fulfill our responsibilities in administering Tit Ic Vi. S incerelv. JOHN W. GARDNER, Secretary.' \h'. I `lialimian. there are just two additional topics I would like to mention. The first has to di with 1)111cc of Education administration of its obligations under Title VI if the Civil ili~lits Act, in this connection we would make the foil \vin~a points 1. The iurp~se of our :ulniin istrative activities is to help school districts to get iflto ci)lIlh)liaii(e and avoid any issue of loss of funds. 2. As if Septeiiihier there were :17 school districts which had lost all Fed- eral fuiids because of failure to siibiiiit an acceptable desegregation plan. There are an add itiomial 7% districts which have been cited for hearings and which may lose their funds if the mu] imigs of Federal examiners go against them. Approxi- miiately 2)1)0 schi 1 (listm'icts. which formerly maintained dual school systems, ale teceivilig tunIs as hip result of using the compliance procedures. 3. We have attempted to focus the attention of our small staff on those thisti'ict~ \vlIihi have had tile greatest pi'oblenis with making their free-choice idan~ operate effectively. We have deferred the award of new funds to some 70 f these districts. but they continue to receive money for programs already ap- proved. This deferral if funds follow-s a procedure established by the Attorney I ~enera I. Secondly. I would like to mention that we have received substantial help in ur s -lool desezi'egai-l in efforts from State and local officials. The State of Fl'ida provides an exaiiiple. Two years ago, less than 3 percent of all Florida chiildi'en attended school with whites. Last year, the percentage had risen aliii ist 10 percent. and it is estimated that this year it will reach close to 20 percent. Such a si~niflcant increase is due in no small part to the acceptance by the State educational a~ency of a constructive role in eliminating Florida's dual ~ystenm of schools as rapiiilv a~ possible. Wherever possible, the Office of Education tries to decentralize administrative responsibility for desegregation so that those who make the initial decisions are in close contact with local school officials. We also seek to strengthen the ca- pabilities of existing State and local educational agencies for providing assistance and leadership. A Title IV grant has been made to the Florida educational agency to establish a full-time unit of 10 people, working at the State level, to help local schools with desegregation problems. Similar units have now also been established in other Southern and border States-Georgia, Tennessee, Delaware, and Maryland. Finally let me say that any school district that is not in compliance with the Provisions of the Civil Rights Act seems to us to represent a defeat. It means failure on our part and failure on the part of those responsible for the schools. Our failure arises from our inability to he of sufficient help in achieving voluntary compliance. The failure of the schools arises from some combination of local conditions that threatens the opportunities of all children to receive the best possible education. We are seeking always to be fair and just. Our legal respon- sibility is clear-to adhere to the procedures and policies established in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and supported by the decisions of the Federal courts. MEMORANDUM MARCH 7, 1966. To: Harold Howe II. Commissioner of Education. From: Munson W. Wihicox, General Counsel. Subject: Title VT-Civil Rights Act-Revised Statement of Policies for Desegre- ga tion Plans-Test for Performance. Tills relates to your request for my opinion on the validity of a test of effective-. ness to determine the need for a change in a school system's freedom of choice desegregation plan. The test would be based upon the percentage of Xemrro PAGENO="0835" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLCATION AMENDMENTS 1657 students who were ill fact transferred from segregated schools. The percentage of transfers expected would vary as outlined in the Statement of Policies, de- pendent upon the rate of transfers in l)revious years. "Where there is substantial deviation from these expectations, and the Commissioner concludes, on the basis of the choices actually made and other available evidence, that the 1)lan is not operaling fairly, or is not effective to meet constitutional and statutory requirements, lie will requl ~e the school system to take additional steps to further desegregate ii. "Such additional steps may include, for example, reopening of the choice period, additional meetings with parents aiid civic groups. furl her arriulge- ments with State or local officials to limit opportunities for intimidation, and other further community preparation. Where schools are still i(lentifiable on the basis of staff composition as intended for students of a particular race. color, or national origin, such steps must in any such case include substan- tial further changes in staffing patterns to eliminate such identifiability. "If the Commissioner concludes that such steps would he ineffective, or if they fail to remedy the defects in the operation of any free choice plan, he may require the school system to adopt a different type of desegregation plan." [Italic added.] The Comniissioilei"s authority in this area stems from tile HEW Regulation to effectuate title VI of the Civil Rights Act of P104 (43 CFR Part SO). Fnder section 80.4(a) of that Regulation and l)ursuaflt to requirements under section 5(14 (hi , au assurance of conipliani'e, which has been stundiu'dized within the Department as HEW Form 441, is required of each local school system a~ a con- dition to the extension of Federal financial assistance. Section 80.4 (ci, however, provides an alternative to the provision of such an assurance if the school system submit a final desegregation order of a Federal Court or "a plan for tile desegregation of such school or school system which the Commissioner of Education determines is adequate to accomldish the purposes of the Act auid this Regulation, and [if the school system] provides reasonable assurance that it will carry out such plan in any case of continuing Federal financial assistance the Colnlnissioller may reserve the right to redetermine, after such period as may be specified jy him, the adequacy of the plan to accomplish the purposes of the Act and this regulation." Three questions are presented as discussed below. 1. May tit c Coni in issioncr deterinin e tii e adequacy of a p1aii solcli~ on the basis of results ach ie t'ed as measured b!/ tile pci-rca taqe of st ,ulcnts IC/lU transfer from segre~iated schools and without regard to whet/icr the school system acted to prevent transfer~ In tile years imniediately following the second Brown decision 1 there were many assertions that so long as a school systeuii with racially segregated schools did not prevent Negro students from transferring to other 5(110015. tile students were not deprived of their Constitutional rights. In short, it was not tile niainte- uiance of a dual school system. hut the prohibition against the Negi'o students' attending the schools attended by whites which constituted discrimination.1 \Vllether this was ever generally considered g ed law is inimatei'ial for our purposes here, because cleai'iy it is not the rule followed by the (`oui'ts tO(1av. It now is well recognized that the discriminatory effects of almost a century of compulsory segregation and the many years of involuntary servitude which pre- (eded that, are not over('olne by allowing Negi'o studeuits to attend the formerly all white schools w-hule tile s('hool system continues to maintain schools intended for students of a particular race, color. el national origin. In ~S'inqieton v. Jackson Mnnieipai Separate Se/i ool District 34S F.2d 720, 730, note 5 (C.A. a, 1005) the Court stated "In retrospect. tile second Bi'own opinion clearly imposes on public school authorities the duty to provide an integrated school system. .Jll(lge Parker's w-ell know dictuill "File Constitution. in other words, does not require in- tegration. It merely forbids diScrinlination.' 1 in iirip,qs v. Elliott, E.D.S.C. 132 F. Supp. 7(50. 777. should he laid to rest. It is inconsistent w-ith Brown and the latter development of decisional and statutory law in the a rea of ci~i1 rigilts.'' 1 Brown. v. Board of FdP(CO~Ofl. 549 U.S. 294 (19331. I Sea Bri.qq.~ v. T7liott, 122 F. Soup. 776. 777 TIP.. ~ 19351 :Arrri, V. TViehitq Falls Ire!. Celiool Jii.~t.. 241 F. 20 220 (CA. 5th, 1937) ecrt. den .2.53 U.S. 935 (1957) ` Bo'~ton v Rijre'. 2.05 F. 20 49 (CA. 5th. 1(160,. PAGENO="0836" 165S ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS More recently that same Court had occasion to note: "The Constitution forbids unconstitutional state action in the form of .egregate(1 facilities, including segregated public schools. School authori- ties. therefore, are un(ler the constitutional compulsion of furnishing a single, integnited selin 1 system." The collcul'riiig 1 itioii of an opinion of Judges Sobeloff and Bell in Bradley v. Boartl of City of Richmond stated in part "Affirina ti ye a eti 11 mea its more than telling those who have long been (leI)rive(l of freeloni of educational opportunity, `You now have a choice.' lii many ihstnnces the choice will not be meaningful unless the administra- tors are willing to bestow extra effort and expense to bring the deprived juimis up to the level where they can avail themselves of the choice in fact as well as in theory. A court before approving a plan, must scrutinize it in detail to s:ti~fv itself that the assumptions upon which the l)lau is predicated are actually present. The district judge must determine whether the means exist for the exercise of a choice that is truly free and not merely pro forma. This may involve, considering, for example, the availability of transporta- tion. the opportunity to pit rticipate on equal terms in the life of the school after the I)uPils arrival. afl(l any other circumstances that may be pertinent." (itlier c,iirt~ 115 have recognized the obligation of the school system to do Inure than refrain froiii interfering with transfers. In Wright v. County School Boa,'! of Gcocn.~rilic County. F. Supp. (E.D., Va.; (January 27, 1966) the C art stated This circuit has recognized that local authorities should be accorded onsi(ierable discretion in charting a route to a constitutionally adequate school systeimi. Freedom of choice plans are hot in themselves inv;ilicl. They lay. Ii wever. be invalid because the `freedom of choice' is illusory. The luau mtust he tested not only by its provisions, but by the manner in which it (lerates to provide opportunities for a desegregated education. In this re- spect operation under the plan may show that the transportation policy or the capacity f the schools severely limits freedom of choice, although pro- visions concerning these phases are valid on their face." ~iiiuilar holdings are contained in: Doweli v. School Board of Ohiahoma City, Oh/a.. 244 F. Supp. 971 (W.D. 0km., 1965): Bell v. School Board of City of Staun- toit, Ta.. . F. Supp. (W.D. Va., Jan. 5, 1966) and Kier v. School Bo,rd of C'ounty of Augusta, F. Supp.. (W.D. Va., Jan. 5, 1966). Iii Ju',c v. Paihan,. 252 F. 2d 256 (1960), the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Ciruit recognized the obligation of a school district "to disestablish a system of imposed segregation". 2 ]Iau f/ic Commissioner require in every such case of ineffectiveness that f/ic school .s~istein make substantial further changes in staffing pattern8 of f/ic se/tools to eliminate identifiability of schools as intended for students of a particular race? That the identifiability of a school as intended for Negro students is a restric- tion upon the right of free choice and inconsistent with a valid desegregation plan. can scarcely l)e denied. Whether a school is so designated by the use of clear words to that effect or whether it is so identified through other indicia including staff assignments, the school system has not met its responsibility to eliminate dual school arrangements, as already described in this memorandum. "The defendants by the segregation of teachers, continue to maintain three clearly-delineated Negro schools. `[T]he presence of all Negro teach- ct's in a school attended solely by Negro pupils in the past denotes that school a `colored school" just as certainly as if the words were printed across its entrance in six-inch letters'. Brown v. County School Board. 245 F. Supp. ~49, 560 (W.D. Va. 1965)" Icier v. School Board of Coun.ty of Auqu.sta, supra. Moreover, for some time cases have indicated that in the consideration of particular plans for desegregation, some involving zoning and other choice, the si,q~etou v. .TackRon Municipal Separate Sc/too/ District, F. -, (CA. 5th. Jan. 20. i toil;. Tie Court did recognize that administrative problems may justify an orii-rlv iransitton period during which the desegregation may take place, but even so, It tell hit Sits transition may not pi'event any individual child, even though in a grade not vet ached by the desegreration plan, from exercising his right to transfer. 4 242 F. 21 210. 223. (CA. 4th. 1965). Reversed on other ground.s, U.S. , 15 L. Ed. 2d 1ST. SO S. Ct. 224 (1965). PAGENO="0837" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTCATION AMEND~JENTS 16.59 court should consider the possible effect of `assignment of teachers by race not as seeking to protec't rights of such teachers, but as a claim iliat out iniied assigning of teaching personnel on a racial basis impairs the si u1.olits' rights to an education free from any consideration of race.'' lie pp V. Doqio' Of Liii- cation, City of Chuttanooga, Tcnn., 319 F. 2d ,5T1. 576 (`A.. Oih 1963) : Xort/t- cross v. Board of Education. City of ]Ieinpltis, Trait., 333 F. 2d (161 (C.A. 6th, 1964) : .Jeckson v. School Board, City of Lynch bury. Va.. 321 F. 2d 230 (C.A. 4th, 1964) ; Augustus v. Board of Public instruction, Escambia County,, Flu., 306 F. 2d 802, tC.A. 5th 1902) : Board of Public Instruction of Decal County. Fla. v. Braxton, 326 F. 2d 616, 620 (C.A. 5th, 1964) Christmas V. Board of Education of Hartford County, ]Iarylan4, 231 F. Supp. 331 (D.C., 1).M(l., 19(14) ; Dowel! v. School Board of Oklahoma City, OkIa., supra; Bell v. School Rouid of City of Staunton, Va., supra; and Kicr v. School Board of County of Augusta, supra. In the Oklahoma City case the court said (at 978) where the cessation of assignment and transfer policies based solely on race is insufficient to bring about more thaii token change in the segre- gated system, the Board must devise affii'iuative action reasonably imrposed to effectuate the desegregation goal. This is not new law." Recently the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit stated that it is "essential that the plan provide an adequate start toward eliniinaion of race as a basis for the employment and allocation of teachers, administrators and other per- sonnel." Singleton v. Jackson Municipal Separate School District (Jan. 26, 1906). supra, note 3. In Bradley v. School Board, City of Richmond, supru. note 4, the Inited States Supreme Court vacated a lower court's order, saying, "There is no merit to the suggestion that the relation between faculty allo('ation on an alleged racial basis and the adequacy of the desegregation plans is entirely speculative." The fact that schools remain identifiable as intended for Negro students be- cause of the staffing pattern and time further fact that theme is not effectivo desegregation in the actual operation of the free choice plan, lrovidle a reason- able justification for the Commissioner to hold that the objectives of title VI and the Regulation cannot be achieved unless time racial identification of the schools is removed. The importance of prompt steps to wipe out such identification is under- scored by the difficulty of having a choice period or of otherwise reassigning children after the school year has commenced. The relatively short period which intervenes between the choice period and the time wheim final plans should be made for the operation of schools for the coming year, argues for more prompt action than complicated factual evaluations permit. Staff reassign- ment to remove the identifiability of schools on a racial basis should not be foreclosed even if the school system should assert that other steps might secure results. In fact, if the school system knew of actions whelm could have been taken to secure better results, it should already have taken them. It should be recognized that changes required in a plan including those ad- dressed to the removal of the identifiability of schools on a racial basis, would not always substantially affect assignments for the school year for which the poor performance is indicated. The objective of a desegregation plan is the total elimination of the dual school system, however, and the test of performance Is significant, not only as measuring what will happen in 1966-7, but also as a gauge of progress toward the final objective. If less than the expected showing is made for the coming school year, there is every reason to insist on steps calculated to speed up the process thereafter, and to set the stage for freer choices for the succeeding school year. In expressing the foregoing views, I am cognizant that section 604 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, provides that nothing in title VI "shall he construed to authorize action under this title by any department or agency with respect to any employment practice of any employer That section, in my opinion, does not preclude the action referred to above. Even if we assume that the assignment of teachers by the public school system is an "employment practice", section 604 does not preclude action based upon the need to prevent discrimination against students as beneficiaries of the Federal nid as distinguished from actions taken for the sole purpose of protecting em- PAGENO="0838" 1660 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS ployees as beneficiaries (i.e., their employment being the benefit) from discrimi- nation with respect to practices applied to them. This is demonstrated by the express language which makes section 604 in- applicable "where a primary objective of the Federal financial assistance is to provide employment.' Moreover, the legislative history indicates that the Con- gressional concern which led to section 604 related to situations where the em- ployment could not he identified with possible discrimination against beneficiaries of the programs receiving Federal financial assistance.5 The principal thrust of title VI is to eliminate discrimination against the beneficiaries of Federal financial assistance, other than as employees, as set out in section 601. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is highly remedial legislation.6 Where provisos and exceptions such as section 604 are susceptible to alterna- tive constructions, they should be read so as to avoid defeating the primary purpose of the Act.7 Where, as the decisions cited above indicate, an employment practice operates not only as a discrimination upon the students on the ground of race, color, or national origin but also as a restriction upon their exercise of free choice. sec- tion 604 does not limit the Commissioner's authority to act as described above any more than it limits his authority to object to a desegregation plan should a school adopt an employment practice of denying promotions to teachers who fail to discourage Negro students from choosing white schools. It is, therefore, clear that section 604 does not limit the Commissioner's au- thority to prevent discrimination against students, even where the discrimina- tion is a result of staff employment practices. 3. If the Commissioner concludes that further steps would be ineffective or fail to remedy the defects in. the operation of a free choice plan, may be require that the school system elect a different type of desegregation plan than free choice? Under section 80.4(c), the Commissioner has a responsibilty to require changes in a desegregation plan if he determines than the plan is not adequate to accom- plish the purposes of title VI and the Regulation. If he deterniines that the situation in a given school system is such that a free choice plan will not he adequate he has no option but to require. for continued compliance, a type of plan which he can determine will be adequate. U.S. SENATE. Washington, D.C., April 5, 1966. Hon. HAROLD HOWE II, (Thin in issioner of Education. Department of Health. Education, and Welfare, TVashiinpton, D.C. Drxn Pu. Howr: Enclosed for your consideration is a letter dated April 1. addressed to me by Mr. Leland Stratton. President of the Board of Education of the Public Schools in Stuttgart, Arkansas. I have received similar letters from the School District in Texarkana. Arkansas. and the Board of Education in Arkansas City. Arkan~a~. I have also reviewed your revised statement of policies for school desegregation plans and the several auxiliary documents which participating school systems are required to sign, publish, or mail to families of students in the system. In order that I may respond to these letters. I would appreciate receiving from you: (1) a discussion of the ways in which the new guidelines may he different from the guidelines followed by these school systems in 1965; (2) an explanation of the reasons for and the authority for these changes; and (3) your specific comments upon the numbered assertions contained in the letter addressed Cf. Minority Riport in house Report No. 914. p. 09 (55th Cong.. 1st Sess.) with 110 (`onr. Ree.. pp. 0545. 12720. 12714. Conaress, as well as the two Presidents who recommended the l~rislation. clearly intended to cr1 di C7 to a ii unhappy chapter in cii r hi stir.'' [Ta in ci V. Cit ii at lock 1-Till. - I S (3 1 1 04 II of I H into tcl In a I cite I fit "0 1 " 241 (1004~ See alsu house Report No. 914. S'~th (`our.. 1st Sons.. p. 15 : Id.. Part 2. p. 2 Ri t this liii! can and will commit our Nation to the elimination of many of the worst manifestations of racial prejudice." huh V. lohiertson. 2('(', h'S. 243. 24S (192.1') : Cf. Phillips Petroleum (`a. v. WisconsIn, 247 I'S. 072 (1954'): Interstate Ga.s Co. v. Pousrr Commission. 331 F.S. 652. 691 (1947') UnitCd ~faten v. ,S'r'l,crton. 255 I'S. 515 (1932'). See merno'tunilum. June 10. 1905. Laurence Davis to General Counsel. "Civil Rights Act: Dismissal of Negro schoolteachers." PAGENO="0839" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDtCATION AMENDMENTS 1661 to me by Mr. Stratton. Your prompt attention to this request will be appreciated. Sincerely yours, J. W. FULBRIGHT. STUTTGART PUBLIC SchiooLs, Stuttgart, Ark., April 1, 1966. Hon. J. W. FIJLBRIGHT, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. Sin: School administrators and board members are disturbed over the "Re- vised Statement of Policies for School Desegregation Plans L'nder Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 19434" which has just been handed to us. 1. It changes our plan of desegregation which we accepted last year and which we have kept in good faith after approval from the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. 2. The revised orders violate the Civil Rights Act of 19434 in requiring racial balance in schools and goes much further than Congress iiitended. 3. The changes demanded have come to us after obligations and contracts with teachers have been made and compliance with them will force the adminis- tration and school board to renege on contracts and commitments already made to teachers and pupils. 4. The policies force the use of certain language, which is not the will of the school authorities, in notices to parents and advertisement in the paper and requires that the school adopt it in toto. When official freedom of expression is denied, the time is not far away when personal freedom of expression also will be denied. 5. The time schedule for advertisement and registration of pupils cannot be met because of the late notice to the schools. 6. The severity of the changes will create antagonism among teachers, pupils, and patrons and, hence, will cause serious problems in administration of the schools. 7. It destroys all confidence on the part of those who have thus far workel to meet the law with courage and sincerity because we find that we cannot trust the authorities who approved our original plan. S. It leaves the feeling that the Civil Rights leaders are using a club to force their will and show no respect for our rights or opinions. There can be no enthusiastic attempt on the part of administrators or hI lard iiieiiihers to comply with such orders and the entire school system will suffer. 9. It i~1ac'~ financial strain on schools to advertise, send letters, and employ a(1dilional clerical assistance to get letters to patrons. 10. It flakes no provision for local tra(litions iiiid ol)inions hut assumes that all situations can he handled in the sonic manner. There are some 150 or more schools in Arkansas that have none or few negroes while seine have as much as 60% negro. 11. It imposes a tyranny over our schools which affects the lives of all our people and destroys their faith in our government. 12. `We feel that we should be allowed to (out inue with the three year plan which was approved by the Commissioner of Education an(l which the schools and its patrons have accepted. Continual and niore stringent rea:iluutioiis will but lead to resentment and possil)le rebellion. `We enclose with this letter the follow-inc louinellts 1. The Form 441-B we are now required to sign for part ((`ipation iii Fed- eral Funds. The revised sta tell uent of policies ñ r 5(11 ool de cz'reg:l t i m plans of March. 1966. The mandatory texts of notices, letters. :111(1 choice forms prescribed by the Commissioner of Education for use with school desegre- gation plans of March, 1966. 2. Guide Lines for school desegregation dated March 1. 1966. 3. Photostatic copy of clipping from Gazette of April 1. 1966. Last week a team of advisors was sent into the State by the Office (if Educa- tion of the Department of Health. Education and `Welfare. This team met with the School Superintendents and School Board MemI)eI's from throu~houit tile State at Little Rock on March 23, 1966. The attitude of this team, to say time least, was arbitrary on racial balancing, w-ithout regard to academic standards PAGENO="0840" 1662 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS and qunlifications. The team consisted of the following persons from the office of I)r. I)avid Seeley, U.S. Office of Education: Mr. Jim Hope Mr. John Hodgson Miss Caren Kareger Our Purrose in writing you and telephoning you as we have is with the hope that we can stir the Arkansas Delegation in Congress to do whatever it can to iersuade the Department of Health, Education and Welfare to modify its policies so as to hermit us to work out our desegregation problems within the three years set by that Department without annual or more frequent depart- nieiital interference of the type displayed in these new regulations. The Civil Rights people have been pouring the pressure on the Department. These regulations under the guise of "Guidelines" are a result of that pressure. It is high time organized pressure from the opposite direction be applied to this department. We may be uninformed, but we feel that no organized pres- sure has yet developed in Congress (and that is where it should come from since this is a usurpation of Congressional authority even more so than of ours) to counteract the pressures brought by the radical Civil Rights people. We are asking that the Arkansas Delegation in Congress, if necessary, assume lea(l°rship and initiative in developing a movement on the Congressional level (hire(ted at the Office of Commissioner of Education to keep its regulations wit bin bonds. M~iy we enlist your leadership and assistance in this effort? We make this request notwithstanding we may vote to file a compliance report under the new ~`Guidelines". Our acceptance will in no manner right the wrongs created by these regulations. We realize that the Department may seek to deny this district Federal Funds and may seek to impose other sanctions against us for this expression of opinion. We feel so strongly about the issue that we are willing to take that risk. Very truly yours, LELAND STRATTON. MAY 24, 1966. Hon. J. W. FULBRIGHT, r.s;~. I~enofe, TVa.chOmgtom, D.C. DEAR SENATOR FULBRTGHT: This is in response to your letters of April 5 and 26 re~arding the 1966 school desegregation guidelines and Title VI of the Civil Rirhts Act of 1964. Tn your first letter you sent on to us a letter to you from Mr. Lelnnd Stratton, President of the Board of Education in Stuttgart, Arkansas, and requested that I (1) discuss the differences between the 1965 and 1966 school desegregation guidelines: (2'~ explain the reasons and authority for the changes: and (3) comment specifically upon the numbered assertions in Mr. Stratton's letter. In the second letter you stated that Arkansas has made a conscientious start in the desegregation of its schools, pointed out that elected school officinls have to he able to lead their constituents if desegregation is to he orderly. and expressed the hope that I could assure you that in the ad- ministration of the guidelines, due regard will be paid to the differences among the various school districts of Arkansas. I believe that Secretary Gardner's letter of April 9 provided at least a partial answer to your questions. but because of the breadth and importance of the issues raised in your letter. a more detailed answer to your questions seems desirable. Because your second request raises legal questions. I asked my staff to nreprire a special memorandum on the authority for the guidelines, and in particular on the provisions respecting faculty desegregation and the effective- ness of free choice plans. both of which are matters of much concern to school officials affected. A copy of this memorandum and other materials which I heli'~ve will rive useful background information are enclosed. Much of the concern about the 1966 guidelines, arises from a belief held by l~ev nrovisinns mentioned above in particular. arises from a belief held by many that it is constitutional to maintain a system of separate schools for Nerro and white children, with senarate Nerro and white faculties, as lone as any Negro child who so wishes may attend a white school. As you know, of course, this belief is erroneoii~. The ~ecisinns of the Supreme Court and the PAGENO="0841" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTJCAT1ON AMENDMENTS 1b63 lower Federal courts discussed in the enclosed memorandum make it clear that the maintenance of a dual system of schools for childreii of different races is unconstitutional, and that it is the duty of local school othcials to establish a single system of schools for all children, white and ~egro. Inc uecisious also make it clear that desegregation necessarily includes faculty desegregation and that delay in desegregating schools is no longer tolerable. As your second letter points out, Arkansas has made a start in the desegrega- tion of its schools. Last fall, some school systems in Arkansas completely de- segregated their schools and most others started desegregation in accordance with the 1965 guideline. Most of these school systems agreed to assign students to particular schools on the basis of the choices made by pupils' parents. Most districts agreed to start faculty desegregation by holding joint faculty meetings and in-service training programs on a desegregated basis. Working under the 1965 guidelines, many school systems made significant progress. In these sys- tems, a significant proportion of Negro children entered desegregated schools and school officials made preparations for teacher desegregation. But other school systems made less progress, and some made no progress at all. In some instances, progress was thwarted by the attitude of school personnel, both Negro and white, who made it clear that Negro children should choose to stay in "their" Negi-o schools. In other instances Negroes believed that if they chose white schools for their children, t'hey would incur the displeasure of the white community, and perhaps suffer economic injury. Such beliefs may, in many cases, be incorrect, but they are nevertheless very real to the Negro parents who hold them. Even in communities where desegregation is well accepted, Negroes who have been taught all their lives that Negro children belong in "their" Negro schools are reluctant to send their children "over there to the other school." It has been our experience that problems 511(11 05 these can be over- come only by extensive preparatory work in the Negro and white communities. When such work has not been done, there has been little progress. But whatever the problems encountered by the school systems which have made little or no progress, the law is clear-school systems with a dual school struc- ture must proceed expeditiously in converting to a single, uiisegregated school system. This is a local responsibility. Hence, the 1966 guidelines reflect the expectation, supported by the law, that school systems in carrying out their re- sponsibility to desegregate their schools will he able to progress significantly fur- ther in the 1966-67 school year than they did in 1965-BG. The differences be- tween the 1965 and the 1966 guidelines are not differences in principle. They differ only in placing more emphasis on performance, requiring that progress be made in 1966-67 beyond what was achieved in 1965-66, when schools were start- ing desegregation. Of the specific differences between the 1965 and 1966 guidelines, perhaps the most important concern teacher desegregation. But first of all, it is important to not that the 1965 guidelines also required that "all desegregation plans shall pro- vide for the desegregation of faculty and staff" and that steps shall be taken to eliminate past segregated assignments. The impression that the faculty de- segregation requirements are new arises from the fact that school districts be- ginning desegregation were permitted, during the first year. to prepare their staff for desegregation by joint faculty meetings 011(1 in-service trainin~ programs (Section V-E-4 of the 1965 guidelines. The 1966 guidelines define the objective of faculty desegregation in greater detail than did the 1965 guidelines. The pattern of teacher assignments to schools "may not be such that schools are identifiable as intended for students of a particular race." Moreover, the 1966 guidelines in- dicate that there must be actual progress in teacher desegregation. "Staff de- segration for the 1966-67 school year must include significant progress beyond what was accomplished for the l96.~-6G school year in the desegregation of teach- ers assigned to schools on a regular full-time basis." The guidelines give several examples of what school systems might do in 1966-67 for staff desegregation. One example is "some desegregation of professional staff in each school." There is. however, no requirement that there he any particular pattern or proportion of staff desegregation. Each district is free to proceed as best suits its situation. as long as the progress is real. The enclosed memorandum shows that the staff desegregation provisions are in accord with the decisions of the Federal courts. Another important difference between the 1965 and 1966 guidelines appears in PAGENO="0842" 1664 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS the section concerning the acceptability of free choice plans. Last year the guide- lines provided (Section V-D) that: The responsibility to eliminate segregation rests with school authorities and is not satisfied by rules and practices which shift the burden of removing discrimination to the class or classes of persons previously discriminated against. Desegregation of a school system may, however, be initiated by a `free choice" plan [that assigns pupils in accordance with the standards of the 1965 guidelines.] The 1966 guidelines continue to accept free choice as a means of undertaking desegregation (Section 181.11). But the 1966 guidelines place greater emphasis on the responsibility of school officials to obtain community support so that their free choice plans will be an effective means of desegregation (Section 181.54). They provide that if the choices made will lead to only a small degree of desegre- gation in 1966-67. usually the second year of desegregation, the U.S. Commis- sioner of Education may review the plan to determine whether it is an effective means of meeting the school system's obligation to desegregate. On the basis of all the information gathered in such a review, the Commissioner may take up with the school system further steps that it should take in order that there will be reasonable progress iii 1966-67 toward establishing a single desegregated sys- teiii of schools. In order to give school officials a guide to the standards the Com- missioner would use in scheduling plans for review, the section states, in percent- age terms, the performance that would normally be expected in several situations. Here again, this section reflects the expectation that where local officials imple- ment their plans responsibly. reasonable progress will be made in desegregating schools, but does not set down any rigid requirements of what that progress must be. Each school system's situation will be reviewed according to the facts applic- able to it. These guideline provisions, as the enclosed memorandum shows, are in accordance with the court decisions that school systems must move forward in desegregation. The 1966 guidelines contain several provisions which were not in the 1965 guidelines. For example. Section 181.42 provi(les that a high school student's own choice of school will be binding if his parents do not choose a different school within the choice period. This provision should make free choice plans a more effective nieans of carrying out the responsibility to establish a single system of schools. There are cases where parents are reluctant to choose a desegregated school for their children but may not object if the child makes his own choice of a desegregated school. In February and March, a Federal district court in Alabama included a similar provision in several court ordered plans. Section 181.14 provides that a student attending school on a desegregated basis for the first time may not be disqualified from athletics and other activities be- cause he is a transfer student. He may, of course, be disqualified for some other reason, such as failing grades at his previous school. In many school systems, stiolents ~vhi transfer vluntarily are subject to a one year waiting perioc1 before they can play foothall. but students who are transferred by school authorities in, for example, a school consolidation, are under no such a limitation. Because changes in assignment under a free choice plan are made primarily to satisfy the obligation of the school system to desegregate its schools, rather than because of the transfer desires of the student. such transfers should be treated in the same manner as any other officially arranged transfer. In any case, a waiting period would discourage students under a free choice plan from changing schools and would make free choice plans less effective. This provision is supported by the Oklahoma City school desegregation decision handed down last September, which provided that each student transferring under that desegregation plan shall have all the rights of the school [to which he transfers] academic pro- grams. and athletic programs notwithstanding any rules to the contrary, inasmuch as the law of desegregation supersedes any rules requiring residence and time. $ectirni 1~1.1~ provides that if the facilities at a school established and still maintained for students of a particular race are inferior to those generally avail- able in the school system. the school should be closed and the students assigned to other schools. We have found that in 1966 there are places in the United States where Negro students are still segregated in one and two rooms schools, with little heat and no running water, while white children living in the same locality attend modern brick schools equipped with the latest teaching aids. PAGENO="0843" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1665 Such Negro schools do not even meet the "separate but equal' standard developed in the years following Plessy s-. Fcrgnson, 163 U.S. 537 (1890). The reason and authority for this provision are obvious. In the Lowndes, Bullock, Macon and Montgomery County, Alabama school desegregation eases decided in February aiid March. 1900 the U.S. District Court ordered the closing of 65 such small, inadequate schools. A final difference between the 1965 and 19643 guidelines is found in the various forms issued with the 1966 guidelines. The 1965 guidelines described in general terms the contents of the notices school systems with free choice plans would use to inform parents of their opportunity to exercise a choice of school. Each school was expected to write its own notices and include them with the plan sent to the Commissioner. Because a great many of these notices were inadequate for their purpose, much time had to be spent last summer in helping to prepare proper not iee~ for nuiny individual plans. The acceptance nail iiiiplementation of plans for time 1965-66 school year was delayed, and so w'as the assignment of students to schools. As the result of this experience, it seemed desirable to issue with the 1966 guidelines appropriate texts for school officials to use in their notices, even though not everyone would agree with any particular wording. There ale, of course, other differences between the 1965 and 1966 guidelines, but because they do not seem to be controversial, there is no need to labor them here. With regard to Mr. Stratton's twelve assertions, I will quote them in groups and follow with my comment. 1. It chaiiges our Plan of desegregation which we accepted last year and which we have kept in good faith after approval from the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. 7. It destroys all confidence on the part of those who have thus far worked to meet the law with courage and sincerity because we find that we cannot trust the authorities who approved our original plan. 12. We feel that we should be allowed to continue with the three year plan which was aIprove(l by tIme Commissioner of Education and which the schools and its patrons have accepted. Continual and more stringent regu- lations w-ill but lead to resentment and possible rebellion. Comment. The 1965 guidelines and the letter accepting this school district's plan stated plainly that changes in the guidelines and the district's plan might be necessary from time to time. But no changes of substance in this district's plan are required by the 1966 guidelines, if the plan is an effective means of desegrega ti ii in the d klrict. The plan in this l)artmdul!r case provided for the desegregation of S grades in 1966--67 and 12 grades in 1907-OS. There is no requirement in time new guidelines that this time schedule be changed. In accord- ance with the 1905 guidelines the plan provides for joint faculty meetings and in-service training programs as "a first step toward iiitegration of faculty." The 19116 guidelines require that a second step he taken in 19116-liT Anart from the expectation that this school system make further progress under its plan in 1966-67 toward the desegregation of its students and teachers, the only changes to its plan required by the 1906 guidelines relate to matters of procedure and forum, such as the uniform texts of the letters and notices, tIme reason for which was explained above. With regard to the possibility of "rebellion." I have commented below- in eon- uiection with item 6. 2. The revised orders violate the Civil Rights Act of 19434 in requiring racial balance in schools and goes much further than Congress intended. ~`urn iii e~ t. The eeiiuerii berc ar i s(s I'I~OIum time peren to ges in 1 1 Si .~4. These percentages have been misinterpreted by some as requirinr "racial balance." or a particular percentage of Negro children in schools with white children. As I stated in the (U ~(ussion of 1 15.5- above, the percentages are in the ruiclelines to give school officials some guidance as to a reasonal)le degree of progress that aught normally he expected under free choice plans. Depending on the cir- cumstances. failure to make the indicated progress might. or might not. moan that school officials should take further steps or change their plan so that there will be progress. The guidelines (10 require that rca sommable prorress in made. but nowhere do they require that there be any particular proportion of Negroes and whites in any particular school. The "correction of racial imbalance' `is a phrase referring to the busing of children from neighborhood schools which have not been officially sezregated. hut which, because of residential patterns, are "racially imbalanced." The guidelines do not deal with this situation at all. PAGENO="0844" 1666 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 3. The changes demanded have come to us after obligations and contracts with teachers have been made and compliance with them will force the ad- ministration and school board to renege on contracts and commitments ~dreaJv Iiiade to teachers and pupils. (`omnient: I regret that it was not possible to issue the guidelines until March i. It appeared desirable, however, to consult a great many persons within and without the Government. including many State and local school officials, during the preparation of the guidelines. Arranging the consultations and making use of toe advice given us took longer than was anticipated. Nevertheless, the fact that the guidelines were under revision was widely reported in the press, and chief State school officers were kept informed. The provisions of last year's guidelines and our statements while the guidelines were under revision were such that responsible school officials should have been preparing for further progress in teacher desegregation next fall. 4. The I)olicies force the use of certain language, which is not the will of the school authorities, in notices to parents and advertisement in the paper and requires that the school adopt it in toto. When official freedom of expression is denied, the time is not far away when personal freedom of expression also will he denied. CO?flweflt: As I explained above, our experience last summer demonstrated the advantages both to local school officials and to the Office of Education of providing acceptable notices and forms ahead of time and on a uniform basis. 5. The time schedule for advertisement and registration of pupils cannot be met because of the late notice to the schools. (`oniwcnt: The choice period required by the guidelines could start as late as April 1. 25 days after the guidelines were issued. Section 181.62 states that if a required procedure is not feasible, the Commissioner may accept an alterna- tive if he determines it will accomplish the same purpose. Late starts have been permitted when there is a good reason for them. 6. The severity of the changes will create antagonism among teachers, pupils. and patrons and, hence, will cause serious problems in administra- tion of the schools. 5. It leaves the feeling that the Civil Rights leaders are using a club to force their will and show no respect for our rights or opinions. There can he no enthusiastic attempt on the part of administrators or board members to comply with such orders and the entire school system will suffer. 10. It makes no provision for local traditions and opinions but assumes that all situations can be handled in the same manner. There are some 150 or more schools in Arkansas that have none or few Negroes while some have as much as 60% Negro. 11. It imposes a tyranny over our schools which affects the lives of all our people and destroys their faith in our government. Comment: I am, of course, well aware that there are those who doubt the wisdom of the school desegregation decisions, and the Civil Rights Act of 1964. I am also aware, that in some places, providing leadership so that pupils, parents, teachers and the community will accept desegregation is a most diffi- cult task. But, as the enclosed memorandum points out, it is the law that desegregation must proceed expeditiously. Furthermore, it has been our experi- ence that attitudes often change faster than would appear possible beforehand, and that with determined and resourceful leadership, school systems can make significant changes in a short period of time, to the benefit of all concerned. The guidelines provide for flexibility and by no means require precipitous change where local conditions require otherwise. Where local officials assume responsibility locally to bring about the change in a planned and orderly fashion there has seldom been trouble. The complaints of Federal interference and pre- dictions of disorder usually come from communities that have not assumed local responsibility for desegregation. Needless to say, to the extent of our resources, we will work with school officials to help make desegregation a success. I believe most school officials are aware that under Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Office of Educa- tion has consultants available who can provide school officials with on the spot advice about desegregation. It can also arrange for institutes and in-service training programs which will help school personnel deal effectively with the problems of desegregation. We have found that these programs can be very useful in overcoming the problems to which Mr. Stratton refers. PAGENO="0845" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1667 9. It places financial strain on schools to advertise, send letters, and employ additional clerical assistance to get letters to patrons. Uoinrnen~t: We are aware that the cost of printing, and sending out notices has to be met from lean budgets. But if a desegregation plan is to be effective it i.s essential that parents be given direct and individual notice of the plan and how it affects them. Furthermore, it should be noted that far more than the cost of the one mailing is still being spent, even today, on bussing and other arrangements made to preserve segregation, In closing, I can assure you that there will be no doubt of the compliance with Title VI of Arkansas school systems which are proceeding with reasonable speed to establish a single system of schools. We will have to work closely with those districts which are making less progress and we will, of course, take into account their particular problems. If there is any assistance we can give to you and your staff in working with such school (liStrictS I hope you will call upon us. Sincerely, HAROLD HOWE II, U.s. Conwn is8iOner of Education. April 2.5, 1966. To: Chief State School Officers. From: Harold Howe II, U.S. Commissioner of Education. Subject: Special Civil Rights Compliance Problems in Summer Programs under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. All school districts operating summer preschool and other suniitier programs should be reminded that all such programs must he operated on a arnidiscrimina- tory basis. School districts operating under desegregation plans should refer to ~ 181.14(b) (4) of the revised desegregation Guidelines which provides that: All special educational programs, such as preschool. summer school and adult education, and any educational program newly instituted, must he conducted without segregation or any other form of discrimination. Free choice desegregation procedures normally cannot be applied to such pro- grams. For those school districts working under school desegregation plans for their regular school program, summer projects provide an opportunity for helping the community with the transition and helping the staff prepare for faculty desegregation during the coming school year. The way in which summer pro- grams are used for this purpose can demonstrate the good faith of a school district in carrying out its desegregation plan. Summer projects approved under Title I by the State educational agency either before or after the issuance of the revised desegregation Guidelines are subject to the same nondiscrimination requirements. Your agency must make special efforts to make sure that such projects are not begun on a segregated basis, in order to avoid the possible necessity of discontinuing or reorganizing the project after it has begun. If a school district plans to conduct the same or similar activities at more than one location an evaluation must be made to determine whether this separa- tion is justified on some basis other than the maintenance of segregation. In making this evaluation the State educational agency should consider the racial composition of the teaching staff, whether the school at each location is thought of by the public as being for white or Negro children and whether the activities could be conducted at one location where members of both races would feel free to attend. Another way of stating these requirements is that summer projects under Title I of P.L. 89-10 and Head Start programs under OEO will operate along parallel lines with respect to civil rights compliance. While an area for a summer project may need to be selected on the basis of the number of children from low-income families currently attending a particular school all of the children residing in the area surrounding that school should be considered for participation in the project according to their needs without regard to race, color, or national origin. Such a project normally should not be conducted at a school identified as a Negro school if there is another school not so identified within the project area or reasonably close to it. It should be emphasized that the foregoing principles apply to the selection of school facilities, children, and staff for preschool projects. PAGENO="0846" 1668 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS The State educational agency should attempt to secure a proper revision of any summer project that is likely to be operated on a discriminatory basis. Failing that, it Is the responsibility of the State agency to notify the Commis- sioner of Education in order that he may determine the action to be taken under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE, July 1, 1966. MEMORANDUM To: Chief State School Officers. From: Harold Howe II. U.S. Commissioner of Education. Subject: Responsibilities of State Education Agencies in Assuring Compliance for State Approved Projects. Recently a number of State departments of education have raised questions concerning their responsibility for assuring compliance with the nondiscrimina- tioii requirements of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Several State systems have objected that their agencies are not enforcement agencies and have no respon- sibility to assure that federally assisted programs funded through their agency are in compliance with the Act. I feel that it is most important that State agencies be reminded of their responsibilities in this area. The intent of Congress in enacting Title VI was that no further Federal assistance should be provided for programs in which there is discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin. Since, in many Federal education programs, the Congress has also prescribed that much of the educational leadership and administrative responsibility for the program shall be borne by the State departments of education, it is evident that State educational agencies have an important responsibility for carrying out the non- discrimination policies now written into all of these programs. Each State educational agency has filed with the Office of Education a State- ment of Compliance giving its assurance that it will fulfill these responsibilities as a condition for the receipt of Federal financial assistance through the Office 1 Education and outlining the methods of administration to he used by the State department of education in carrying theiii out. Each agency has set out, among other things, the methods it will use to `Review- periodically the practices of the State agency, school districts, and other agencies participating in these programs, to ascertain and assure that these practices are in conformity with the Regula- tion and the Statement of Compliance." The instructions accompanying the Statement of Compliance forms, issued December 1964, stated that "While it is recognized that some discriminatory l)ractices may occur in school (listriets and other agencies which are not within the control of the State agency, the methods of administration must describe the efforts that the State agency w-ill mimake to effect compliance (such as advice and consultation), and must provide that where such efforts fail, the U.S. Commissioner of Education will be so advised." Such methods must also provide for the evaluation of compliance. for taking timely action to correct discriminatory practices found to exist, and for keeping the Office of Education informed regarding the disposition of corn- pla i nts. Failure of the States to carry out these responsibilities violates the intention of Congress to maintain the decentralization of educational responsibility in the States and local school (listri('ts. It invites Federal action where it may not he needed. It furthermore constitutes a violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights ~ct which could jeopardize the continued participation of the entire State in federally assisted programs. The recent examples which have given rise to these questions of State responsi- l)ihity have come up under the summer programs financed through Title I of the Elnienta ry and Secondary Edu('ation Act. My nieniorancluni of April 25 called attention to the importance of State educational agencies reviewing summer prolects to make sure that they would he operated on a nondiscriminatory basis. Some State departments of education have informed local school districts of the April 25 milemmiora miduimi a mid have underta ken to review all rrojects to assure (`omlipliance. Others have nit (lone so. We are now' receiving (`omplaints of segregated sumniiier progl'anIs conducted in violation of Title VI. There is par- ti('ular collier mm ahi ut I hose shool districts which have purposely switched the fumiding of their suiiiiier preschool programs froni the Office of Economic Oppor- tunitv to the Elemiientam'y and Secondary Act in the hope of avoiding the non- (liscrmnlmnation m'equiremnent. PAGENO="0847" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1669 We are now planning visits to some of these programs to review these charges. I hope that if any such visit is required in your State you will assign a staff member to work with our staff in remedying any noncompliance. If we cannot count upon State agency responsibility in this niatter we will have to review the status of compliance of the State educational agency with its Statement of Compliance. I am sorry to say that we have heard of some instances in which local school districts have canceled their summer programs rather than comply with the nondiscrimination requirements. I hope that the strongest leadership can be exercised froni the State level to prevent local school districts from taking such action. Already we have received strong pleas from local groups for the Federal Government to finance directly programs to hell) (lisadvantaged youngsters where local school authorities have abdicated their responsibility for using the avail- able funds for the purpose intended by the Congress. I am sure you feel that direct Federal funding or operation of such programs is not (lesired by most peoPle. l)ut you should recognize that failure of local school districts to take responsible action will certainly increase the pressure for such an alternative. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTh. EDUCATION. ANI) WELFARE. OFFICE OF EDUCATION. TVash ington, D.C., August 9, 1966. Hon. AUsTIN R. MEADOWs. Superintendent of Education. state Depart ment of Education, Montgomery, Ala. DEAR SUPERINTENDENT MEADOWS: Each day we are faced with more evidence that children from poor homes and from our racial minorities are being doomed to continued poverty and educational deprivation. As you no doubt know- from your own personal and professional experience, schools transmit a climate of expectation and self-esteem to students through their enrollement mix and in- stitutional traditions. The child's perception of his school's place in the edu- cational and (`onhlliunity structure apparently contributes to his relationship to school and society. There is a general tendeiicy for children to shape their lives after the models visible in their environment. Attendance at a school which reflects economic and racial segregation is much Iliore than an academic experience related to the traditional acquisition of knowledge and skills-it helps to establish low expectations for the future. A recent study. Eq uality of Ed oration al Op port en it1~. en sts new light on the educational problems of poor children and on the iIle(Iuities of segregated education. I enclose a copy. I would like to mention also that some people have seen Title I of the Elementary amid Secondary Education Act as allowing the continuance of concentrations of poor and segregated children. I do not believe this is true, 011(1 I am sending you this letter to suggest ways to prevent the development of such a problem. Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Education Act of 19G'S (ESEA), was designed by Congress to meet the needs of educationally deprived children who live in attendance areas where there are ``high concentratj~ns of children from low-income families.'' Many of these areas are actually segre- gate(l housing areas and the (`hildirell suffer both from impoverished home back- grounds and froni isolatioa froni the conimunitv at large. If they are to break away from poverty they must overcome their educational deficiencies and dc- velop the social skills they need in order to function effectively in the larger community. A Title I program that does not consider these objectives probably deserves significant reconsideration. As in all Title I programs, the programs in segregated areas should i)e de- vised so as to concentrate the expenditure of Title I funds to a sufficient degree to bring about significant improvements in the behavior of the most educationally deprived (`luldren. It is not necessary. however, that the children selected for participation in Title I aetivitles receive these services in schools in the low- income a reas in which they reside. The (levelopniellt Of sl)eCial educational assista ace for them mit locations outside their nimimedia te attenO mince a ron s is encouraged provided such assistance is specifically (lesigned 10 mimist their special cducat mn:il nec(1s and the location offers special advantages, such as opp~r- i unities for learning in a widely representative socimi I enviromiimmint. Whemi such efforts are made we would also invite applicants to include a limited number of children from the area where special Title I assistance is PAGENO="0848" 1670 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS to he located and to select such children on the basis of their needs for the same type of assistance. In some cases, this type of arrangement may require the development of cooperative projects between districts. Applicants should not reasonably expect, however, to he able to provide effec- tive special assistance for a child in the "most educationally deprived" cate- gory merely by transporting him to another school. The child will need other special assistance, and the Title I project should seek to provide for it. The arrangements for activities and services to be provided under Title I have been delegated to local educational agencies. You are closer to many of the problems than we in Washington. and can work more immediately to make our schools a training ground for leaders and citizens in a free and open so- ciety. May I suggest. however, that your office, which is charged with the re- sponsil)ility and has the authority to determine whether a local project is ap- provable, exercise leadship in the development of effective programs for educa- tionallv deprived children living in low-income areas characterized by se~re2fltiO11. Sin'erely yours. HAROLD HOWE II. ~ (~ommissi~ner of Education. AuGusT 17, 1966. To: State Title I Coordinators. ESEA. From: John F. Hughes, Director. Division of Compensatory Education. Subject: Distinguishing "new-" and "continuing" activities for Title I applicant's whose funds have been deferred pending compliance with Civil Rights Guidelines. Your office may approve applications from local educational agencies with approved desegregation plans provided (a) that such plans have been amended by fihin~ of a form HEW 441-B. and (h) that the State educational agency has not been notified to defer any grants for "new-" programs pending the resolution of certain civil rights compliance questions. If a local educational agency has not filed an HEW 441-B or if your agency has been notified to defer any corn- initinents of Federal funds or for new activities then only "continuing" Title I activities may he approved as long as the applicant remains in a deferral status. For purposes of identifying proposals for "continuing" Title I projects the following definition should be applied: A proposal for a "continuing" activity is one which would extend a 1965-1966 Title I project activity into FY 1966-1967 and would attempt to achieve simi- lar objectives through similar means (same categories of personnel, equipment, and facilities) without any increase in the size and scope of that activity. The activity, if it is to be classified as "continuing." may not serve substantially more children nor involve the employment of more staff personnel than were actually served and employed the previous year. You should defer any proposed increase in the scope of such an activity until the applicant's compliance has been assured and grant final approval as a "continuing" activity only to that portion of the applicant's proposal which is within the scope of last year's activity. All other activities, including con- struction and purchases of equipment and textbooks, are classified as "new" activities and may not he considered for approval until the applicant's com- pliance has been assured. Your office should not approve a 1966-1967 project proposal, however, merely because it would continue a 1965-1966 project activity. Each such proposal should he approved only after a review of all available pertinent information including evaluative information available on the previous year's project to determine w-hether the current project is likely to be successful in meeting the needs of educationally disadvantaged children and is otherwise approvable under Title I. MEMORANDUM NOVEMBER 29, 1966. To: The Secretary. From: Alanson W. Willcox, General Counsel. Subject: Review of Legal Authority for the 1966 School Desegregation Guide- lines. Pursuant to your recent request, I have reviewed the legal authority for the Revised Statement of Policies for School Desegregation Plans (the "Guide- lines") and my earlier advice to you concerning the legal authority for it. PAGENO="0849" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1671 I have completed this review, and I unhesitantly reaffirm my advice that the 1966 Guidelines are fully consistent with and supported by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the decisions of Federal cou its. In addition to the analysis of court decisions in my memorandum of March 7. 196G. to Commissioner Howe. the pertinent decisions are discussed in a state- ment entitled "Authority for the 1966 School Desegregation Guidelines." That statement served as an attachment to a letter of May 2-1, 1066. from Cominis- sioner Howe to Senator Fulbright. More recently the Courts of Appeals for the Fourth and Fifth Circuits have handed down decisions in IT hccler v. Durham City Board of Education (No. 10,460. CA. 4th, July 5, 1066) and Davis v. Board of School Commissioners of ]Iobile County (No. 22.759. Ci. 5th, August 16, 1966). These reaffirm principles upon which the Guidelines are based, par ticularly the fact that teacher desegregation is an essential part of the desegre- gation plans. Further, in the Mobile case, the Court pointed out as one of the principal legal defects in the plan there under review "the fact that even as to those grades which, under the plan, have actually become `desegregated' there is no true substance in the alleged desegregation. Less than two-tenths of one percent of the Negro children in the system are attending white schools." The Deputy Attorney General recently submitted to Congressman Howard W. Smith, Chairman of the House Rules Committee, a letter requested by him re- garding faculty desegregation. The Chairman had asked whether this Depart- ment has authority, under title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, to require a school district maintaining a dual school system to desegregate its faculty as a necessary part of desegregating its school system. The Department of Justice responded with a letter dated October 4, 1966, and an attachment citing numerous judicial decisions in which the courts had required school districts, as a part of school desegregation plans, to cease hiring and assigning faculty on the basis of race and in many cases to assign teachers for the express purpose of over- coming the effects of past discrimination. The letter concluded with the follow- ing sentence: "For the foregoing reasons we conclude that section 601 [of the Civil Rights Act of 19641 applies to the desegregation of faculty and staff of school systems that have been racially segregated, and that section 604 [of the Civil Rights Act of 1964] does not preclude such application." It should be noted, on the other hand, that the Report of the Senate Com- mittee on Appropriations (pp. 71 and 72, Report No. 1631, 89th Cong., 2d Sess.) questioned whether the Guidelines are consistent with legislative intent on the ground that they allegedly require assignment of pupils in order to overcome racial imbalance. The Committee apparently felt that the definition of "deseg- regation" in section 401(b) of the Act, and the provision of section 407(a) which provides that "nothing herein shall empower any court or official to re- quire the transportation of students to overcome racial imbalance," were in- tended to be applicable to actions under title VI and that the Guidelines required action to overcome such imbalance. We are satisfied that the Guidelines do not require action "to overcome racial imbalance." It should be noted, however, that section 402 specifies that the definitions it contains are "[a]s used in this title" [IV], and also that title VI does not contain the defined word "desegregation" or the word "desegregate." It is therefore difficult to conceive of a court holding that, as a legal matter, the title IV definition is controlling in title VI. Moreover, the context of the quoted language in section 407(a) indicates that it concerns only desegregation actions brought by the Attorney General, and not the refusal or termination of Federal financial assistance under title VI. The Senate Appropriations Committee Report, however, is based upon statements made by Senator Humphrey in re- sponse to questions asked by Senator Byrd of West Virginia. Some time ago my staff prepared a statement showing that an examination of the colloquy in context demonstrates that Senator Humphrey was not re- ferring to requirements applicable to school districts which have been main- taining dual school structures, hut only to what would be imposed in de facto situations which courts have held not to violate the constitutional rights of students. In fact, Senator Humphrey emphasized that the provision in question simply embodied the substance of Bell v. School City of Gary. 324 F. 2d 209 (C.A. 7th, (1963), cert. den. 377 U.S. 924). (110 Cong. Rec. 12715-12717, June 4 1964) The Guidelines are consistent with Senator Humphrey's explanation because he made clear at that time that the amendment did not provent- action "for the T5-492----GT-pt. 2-54 PAGENO="0850" 1672 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDITCATION AMENDMENTS purpose of preventing denial of equal protection of the laws," [i.e., a violation of the children's rights under the Fourteenth Amendment]. (110 Cong. Rec. 12714, June 4, 1964) The Guidelines do not require more for the continuance of Federal assistance than a plan looking toward the elimination of the dual school system as required by the Fourteenth Amendment. These requirements are discussed in my mem- oranclum of March 7. 1966, and the attachment to Commissioner Howe's letter of May 24. 196G. to Senator Fuibright. The performance provisions of which the Senate Appropriation Committee report is critical do no more than follow constitutional requirements. They provide that for the school year 160-07 a school district may comply with title Vi through operation of a choice plan under which schools continue to be maintained for Negroes. But if in practice such plans are not making progress toward the elimination of the dual school system, the Commissioner may require that the school officials take further action to make progress or may require a different type of pla" such as geographic zoning (45 C.F.R. 181.54 . Where a school district assigns children to schools on the basis of non-gerrymandered georraphic zoning. the effectiveness test referred to above does not apply. Obviously, a school system which has adopted a free choice desegregation plan. hut which is making little or no progress in the elimination of its dual school system. is not satisfying its constitutional obligation, as defined by the decisions of the Federal courts, to desegregate its schools. Just as obviously, the Commissioner of Education would not be satisfying his obligation under title VI and the Regulation if he were to determine that such a plan is adequate to carry out the purposes of title VI. Tile percentages stated in the Guidelines do riot provide a rigid rule for the degree of progress required to each school district. They do, however, provide a guide to the Office of Education in determining whether or not a fi'ee choice plan should he scheduled for review and a guide to the school district as to what, in general, might be considered reasonable progress. In this same section. there is an indication of what might be done in tile event there is a substantial deviation from these expectations. Any school district which believes it is being asked to do more than tile law requires has full recourse to an administrative proceeding and a thirty-day notification to Congressional committees before a termination of Federal assist- ance (sec. 602, Civil Rights Act of 19134). Moreover, if it believes the termination to exceed the Commissioner's authority under the law, it is entitled to judicial review as provided in section 603. In c~hort, the decisions of the Federal courts establish that local school officials who have in the past maintained separate schools for Negro and white children are under a constitutional compulsion to provide a single desegregated school system for all children. At no time did the Congress intend in title IV or else- where in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that any school child receive less than his full measure of constitutional protection. The responsibility which school offi- cials who are desegregating their school systems voluntarily must assume in order to qualify for Federal assistance may not, if the purposes of title VI are to be carried out, he any less than the responsibilities imposed on school officials by tile courts in recent school desegregation decisions. Tue Guidelines were issued to inform school officials of what those responsibilities are and are in accord with those decisions. If school systems assuming a lesser degree of responsibilitY were permitted to receive Federal assistance, the purposes of title VI would be thwarted. T-rE SECRETARY OF hEALTh, EDL~CATION. AND WELFARE. Wa.shinptOn. HoNORABLE CARL HAYDEN. Chairman, Senate Appropriations Committee, Washi,WtOfl, D.C. T)E\R Mi~. CIIATRMAN In the Committee on Appropriations Report No. 1631. dated September 22. 1966. the Committee recommended that I reexamine the 1906 Statement of Policies for School Desegregation to see whether they con- formed with the intent of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. I wish to report that the legality of the policies has again been carefully re- viewed both by our own General Counsel and the Acting Attorney General. This review has included both the legislative history of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 PAGENO="0851" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1673 and the recent decisions of the courts. It is the considered judgment of both these officers that the original legal opinions on the policies continue to be valid and that the policies are legal, fair, reasonable and appropriate to carry out the letter and the spirit of Title VI. I have enclosed a memorandum prepared by our General Counsel which details the legality of those provisions about which questions have most frequently been raised. We have also been advised that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has issued an opinion further validating the legality of the School Guidelines. You may be sure that we will continue to develop our policies consistent with the final rulings of the courts. Last year we learned that the publication of the school desegregation policies late in the school year placed a heavy burden on school systems. This year, we have therefore determined to make no significant changes in the desegregation policies issued in March 1966 and to distribute them at this time to the schools. Immediate distribution assures that school systems will have the necessary time for appropriate planning which will insure continued progress in this area. I have also examined and reviewed complaints which go to the manner in which the guidelines have been interpreted and administered by Office of Educa- tion staff. I am convinced that most of the complaints originated because of disagreement with the Department's policy rather than because of failure to carry out these policies properly. Nevertheless, I have asked Commissioner Howe to examine with care the instances in which these complaints occurred and to correct administrative procedures where such action is warranted. Sincerely, JorrN W. GARDNER, Secretary. MEMORANDUM FOR SCHOOL DISTRICTS OPERATING UNDER FREE CHOICE DESEGREGATION PLANS We believe it will help school districts this year if they are more fully in- formed of the procedures the Office of Education will use in reviewing the oper- ation of "free choice" desegregation plans. GENERAL PROCEDURE Each school district with a plan is required to file with the Office of Education by April 15 a report of its anticipated staff and student assignments for next fall. School districts using free choice plans should file the report of their anticipated student assignments within 15 days of the end of the choice period. As soon as we receive the report we will make a preliminary determination of the probable compliance status of the district. Generally speaking those districts operating under free choice plans which meet the criteria set out below will receive a letter indicating that on the basis of the progress reported they appear to be in compliance with the Act and will require no further review this year. If we later receive information indicat- ing less progress than anticipated or other compliance problems, then a review which looks at all aspects of the desegregation plan may be necessary. CRITERIA FOR EXEMPTION FROM REVIEW ON THE BASIS OF SPRING REPORTS Student desegregation For progress in student desegregation beyond what has been achieved in 1966-67, the criteria for preliminary review are those already set out in Section 181.54 of the guidelines. It should be noted that the guideline percentages apply only In cases where there is a "sizeable percentage of Negro students." In many districts with a small percentage (e.g., less than 15%-20%) of Negro students more substan- tial progress in eliminating the dual system than that indicated in Section 181.54 would be expected. Staff desegregation Last year school districts requesting a rough guide to expected progress were told that the equivalent of one classroom teacher assigned on a desegregated basis in each school normally would be adequate evidence of a sufficient start on staff desegregation, so that no review would be required. For the coming school year double that degree of progress and staff desegregation in both form- erly white and Negro schools would be expected to assure that a plan is oper- PAGENO="0852" 16~4 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS ~ltin~ effectively. It should he recognized, again, that this can only he a very ru~Ii measure. For instance, in districts with a few large schools more progress would be expected, and in districts with a great many small schools less might be expected. Of/icr factors Other factors that will be considered in making preliminary reviews include: existence of complaints affecting free operation of the plan, existence of small, inadequate segregated schools and other evidence of unequal programs, evi- dence of building programs which would perpetuate the dual system, and dis- criiiiinatory transfers in or out of he districts. Factors which might indicate adequate progress despite failure to meet the student and staff criteria above might include such consideration as the special difficulties presented in school districts where there is a very high percentage of Negro enrollment in the schools (such as 70% or 80% or more). District.~ requiring review Di$ricts which do not meet the above criteria on the basis of their April 1~ reports will he considered to require further review because of probable compliance problems. These will be divided into two groups: (a) those dis- trict~ whose performance falls substantially below the criteri.a listed above and (hi those districts coming closer to the above criteria but still requiring review. Each district in these two groups will be notified of its status, and those in category (a) above will be visited for a review on a priority basis. Districts in category (b) will not be visited immediately and should review their own plans carefully and take every possible step to improve their progress before school opens in the fall. Review of these districts is likely to fall during the school year. and adjustments to achieve compliance are always more of a prob- lem while school is in session. Sn mm er programs In addition to the operation of their regular desegregation plans, school dis- tricts should be alert to the requirement that their special summer programs can- not he operated on a segregated basis. State officials have responsibility for reviewing carefully the proposals for these programs to make certain that in- eligible projects are not approved. A bulletin about the requirements for sum- mer programs is attached. HAROLD HOWE II, U.S. Commissioner of Education. MEMORANDUM FOR CHIEF STATE SCHOOL OFFICERS CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLIANCE IN SUMMER PROGRAMS OPERATED UNDER TITLE I OF THE ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT OF 1965, AS AMENDED I want to remind you that procedures instituted in 1966 governing civil rights compliance in Title I summer programs remain in effect for projects undertaken by local educational agencies in the summer of 1967. The revised Title VI de- segregation guidelines, issued on January 1, 1967. repeat the 1966 provision (~l81.14(b)(4)) All special educational programs. such as preschool. summer school and adult education, and any educational program newly instituted, must be conducted without segregation or any other form of discrimination. Pree choice desegregation procedures normally may not be applied to such programs. More detailed explanation of the responsibilities of State agencies for en- forcing this provision are contained in my memoranda of April 25. 1966, and July 1, 1966, on this topic. I urge you to review these documents, as they clearly spell out your responsibilities for assuring that summer programs are operated in a totally desegregated fashion. The Office of Education attaches great importance to the effective implementa- tion of these procedures. I hope you will remind the local educational agencies in your State of these requirements. In reviewing and approving applications for summer projects. you are requested to review thoroughly with the applicant the procedures that it will follow to assure that the program will be fully de- segregated. If projects have already been approved, they ghrnlld b~ reviewed PAGENO="0853" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1675 again to assure that this requirement is being met. We hope that a careful review at this time will help avoid the necessity of discontinuing or restructur- ing a project after it has begun. Title I staff will visit selected State agencies this spring to review with State Title I Coordinators the procedures your agency is following. In the meantime, I hope you will call upon us if we can be of assistance in clarifying any relevant matters. HAROLD HOWE II, Tj.$* Commissioner of Education. FEBRUARY 27, 1967. To: Chief State School Officers, State Title I Coordinators. From: Harold Howe II, U.S. Commissioner of Education. Subject: Use of Title I funds in local school districts undergoing desegregation or in racially segregated attendance areas. In its report issued on January 31 the National Advisory Council on the Educa- tion of Disadvantaged Children made the following comment and recommenda- tion ~`As racial desegregation of schools progresses, reports made to the Council indicate that insufficient planning results in some inipoverish Negro children being cut off from the benefits of important programs that may exist in their former segregated schools. . . . A major new area for vigilance and admin- istrative care is that of insuring that special educational services follow the eligible child who is transferred under a school desegregation program." The purpose of this memorandum is to provide (1) the following statement of policy: no child who would otherwise participate in a Title I activity or service is to be denied such participation because of his erercise of the right to enroll in another school and (2) guidance for the implementation of this policy. In this connection your attention is called to my memoranda of April 25, 1966, on summer programs and of July 1, 1966, on the responsibilities of State educa- tional agencies for compliance with the Civil Rights Act. Your attention is also called to my letter to you dated August 9, 1966. concerning the use of Title I funds for children living iii racially segregated attendance areas. Questions have been raised by Title I Coordinators concerning the location of Title I services when children are attending schools under a freedom-of-choice, open enrollment, or other plan designed to bring about desegregation. We realize that with tIme implementation of such plans local educational agencies may need some special guidance in determining the children who will participate in the Title I program. We ask that you advise all Title I applicants in your State as follows: 1. The revised Title I regulations differ from the previous regulations in two important respects regarding project areas: (a) It is no longer permissible to designate as project areas attend- ance areas with less than average concentrations of children from low- income families. (b) The regulations specifically state that projects shall be located where the children can best be served. 2. The purpose of the "attendance area" requirement in Title I is to identify the "target population" from which the children with special needs are to be selected. The children in the target population include all children (a) who are attending a particular public school which has a high concen- tration of children from low-income families (see item 4), (h) w-ho had been attending that school, or (c~ who would be attending that school if they were not attending a private school or another public school under a freedom-of- choice, open enrollment, or other plan designed to bring about desegregation. 3. Educationally deprived children from this group should be selected for participation on the basis of the priority of their needs. Appropriate activi- ties and services designed to meet those needs should be provided at locations where the children can best be served which, in most cases, are the schools they now attend. 4. The degree of concentration of children from low-income families for the purpose of determining eligible attendance areas or "target populations" may be estimated, if better data are not available, on the basis of the number or percentage of children froni low-income families actually attending each of the schools being operated by the applicant local educational agency. PAGENO="0854" 1676 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 5. The only basis on which Title I services may be offered in schools en- rolling children most of whom are not in the "target population" (see item 2) is that those services are designed for arid will be serving primarily educationally deprived children selected from that population. Other chil- dren who have needs which can be met through such a project may par- ticipate in it but the number of such children must be limited so as not to dilute the effectiveness of the project for the children for whom it was designed. 6. The types of services that would be appropriate under these circum- stances include special health, nutritional and social services; guidance and counseling: and remedial programs. In applying such services, consideration should be given to the special needs of the children in their new school environment. The types of services that on the surface would not be ac- ceptable would include such activities as field trips for large numbers of children, general cultural enrichment activities, construction, and the in- stallation of equipment. Again, may I urge you to transmit this memorandum to local educational agencies in your State and to establish appropriate procedures for them to follow with respect to future Title I applications and amendments to applica- tions. Please let us know how many copies you need for this purpose. I would appreciate hearing from you concerning any problems you may have in implementing these provision in your State. FEBRUARY 27, 1967. Hon. JOHN STENNI5. U.S. Seim ate, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR STENNI5: I am sending you herewith a rather lengthy memo- randum of law from this Department's Office of General Counsel, concerning the many points you raised some weeks ago about the policies and practices of the Office of Education for school desegregation under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. I have already written you concerning the status of the Tate County School District, about which you inquired in particular, but in accord- ance with your request the legal memorandum answers your questions both in general terms and with specific reference to Tate County where appropriate. The lawyers have sought to provide comments on every point you raised. I understand that Mr. Barus of the Office of General Counsel and Mr. Cress- well of your staff discussed the memorandum requested at various points. Among other things, we understood from these discussions that you would prefer that the memorandum await the official wording of the Jefferson County deci- sion of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, handed down in late December. By the time the printed opinion in this case was available, a motion for re- hearing by the full court had been filed. The enclosed memorandum accordingly reflects the position of the Department as to school desegregation requirements under Title VI that was arrived at prior to the Jefferson County decision, al- though other recent decisions are noted. I hope the memorandum will be helpful and informative. Sincerely yours, HAROLD HOWE II, U.S. Commissioner of Elueation. February 24, 1967. To: Harold Howe II, U.S. Commissioner of Education. From: Edwin Yourman, Assistant General Counsel, Education Division, Office of General Counsel. DHEW. Subject: Points Raised by Senator Stennis Concerning School Desegregation Policies under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This memorandum is provided in response to your request for analysis and comment on the several points raised by Senator Stennis in his letter to you of October 21. 1966. concerning the legal validity of the school desegregation policies of the Office of Education under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In your preliminary reply to Senator Stennis giving information on the Tate County School District, about which he inquired, you advised the Senator that you had requested a memorandum from the Office of General Counsel in view of the legal nature of the bulk of his questions. Since that time we have had several telephone conversations with the Senator's office concerning the work PAGENO="0855" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1677 at hand. When in December the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals announced its opinion in United Sto tes v. .Jeff(i'soic Coon tq, Civil Action No, 23345, December 29, 1900), the Senator's office agreed that it would he appropriate to include ref- erences to that decision in our memorandum. The corrected and printed version of the court's opinion did not become available, however, until almost three weeks later. By that time a motioii for rehearing by the full court had been filed by the school boards concerned, which ni ti ii has now been granted. Although the present rehearing of this ease makes it inappropriate to cite it as definitively controlling authority, we have not found it necessary to revise the analysis of the law- we developed prior to the niotion for rehearing, and indeed prior to the release of the Je ei'soo County decision itself. This is be- cause our analysis is based primarily on previously issued leading decisions and other key authority. Accordingly, it seems appropriate to transmit this memo- randuin w-ithout aw-aiting any further court decision, We have taken up the various points in the order raised by Senator Stenuis. 1. THE PIJRPO5E OF TITLE vi A5 CON5TRT'ED IN TIlE TIGHT OF COMMENT5 ON "RACIAL nxLxxcE" nv 5ENATOR IIUMPHRF:v In discussing proposed amendments to the then pending bill, Senator Hum- phrey. as floor manager for the bill. niade various eoimiinents to the effect that it was not intended to require "racial balance in schools. Senator Stennis quotes some of these comments on page 2 of his letter, and expresses concern that the policy they reflect may not be being observed in the Office of Education. The court decision Senator I-Iumphrey referred to hI the quoted remarks was handed down in a case dealing with the alleged racial separation of children in the public schools of Gary, Indiana. Bell v. Sc/moo! City of Gary, 213 F. Supp. 819 (N.D. Ind. 1903), aff'd 324 F. 2d 21)9 (7th Cir. 1903). eert. den. 377 U.S. 924 (1964). The issue there was whether the school board could be required to bus children away from neighborhood schools where they were racially iso- lated. or to redraw the school attendance zones, so as to correct the racial im- balance. The court found that the school zones were based on reasonable non- racial criteria and held that because the school board had therefore not deliber- ately segregated the schools, it had no affirmative duty to desegregate them. It is clear from Senator Fluinphrey's comments on this ease quoted by Senator Stennis that racial balance or imbalance in schools was being discussed in con- nection w-ith the bill only in the context of de facto segregation, where racial separation in the schools results fortuitously from housing patterns and geo- graphic factors. In the quoted remarks. Senator Humphrey indicated that the bill was not designed to require the "bushlg of children to achieve racial bal- ance," and that "natural factors such as density of population, and the distance that students would have to travel" would he considered legitimate factors in determining school attendance zones, 110 Cong. Rec. 12717 (1904). Nothing in the policies of the Office of Education under the Act has been contrary to this understanding of its purpose. Nowhere in these remarks of Senator Humphrey's. nor elsewhere in the legis- lative history of the Act, is there aiiy indication that the question of racial balance was considered to arise at all in the case of school districts where stu- dents have been assigned to schools on a racial basis, rather than on the basis of natural factors. In such cases, it seems clear that in order to end racial discrimination as required by Title VI it is necessary to eliminate in an orderly way the dunl structure of schools based on race, in those districts where this work has not yet been completed. In fact, although Title VI applies to all kinds of discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in any institution or program receiving Federal assistance, it is clear that the continued operation of the dual school structure, held unconstitutional in Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954), was one of the major reasons Congress felt that Title VI was necessary. 2. THE EFFECT OF THE DEFINITION OF "DE5EGREGATION" IN 5ECTION 401 (b) OF THE ACT Senator Stennis next refers to the definition of the w-ord "desegregation" provided in Title IV of the Act, which includes a provision that the term as used in Title IV "shall not mean the assignment of students to public schools in order to overcome racial imbalance." The Senator inquires as to the legal PAGENO="0856" 167S ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDtCATION AMENDMENTS and factual basis for finding the Tate County desegregation plan not adequate in the light of this provision, and in view of the fact that 19 Negro students were to attend formerly all-white schools this year under the free choice procedures implemented there. The answer to this question is necessarily based on the conclusions given above in response to the first question. The quoted phrase in the definition of `jde- segregation" in Title IV comes from one of the amendments Senator Humphrey was discussing when he explained that the bill w-as not intended to require action to correct the fortuitous racial imbalance found in the neighborhood schools of such districts as Gary, Indiana. With respect to de jure segregated districts, the Commissioner of Education is legally authorized to determine the adequacy of voluntary desegregation plans * to acconiplish the purposes of the Act" as a condition for the extension of Fed- eral financial assistance. This authority is conferred by § 80.4(c) (2) of this Departments Regulation (45 CFR Part 80) issued as required by § 602 of the Act, by the Secretary with the approval of the President. The Regulation, and its special provision exempting the dual-structure school districts in the Nation, such as Tate County. from the immediate impact of otherwise directly applicable nondiscrimination requirements. are 1)0th discussed below in connection with other questions raised by the Senator. Assuming it to be correct that the definition of "desegregation" in Title IV was intended to pervade Title VI, an assumption contrary to the express working of the definition itself, nothing contrary to that provision was involved in the advice given by letter to the Tate County school officials last fall that their free choice desegregation plan, as it has operated thus far, cannot "reasonably be considered adequate to accomplish the purposes of the Civil Rights Act." The fact is that the 19 Negro students attending formerly all-white schools this year under the free choice plan constitute less than 1% of the 2,489 Negro students enrolled in the system. In Dari8 v. Board of ~chooi Commissioners of Mobile Covnty. 364 F. 2d 896 (5th Cir. 1966'), Mobile's desegration plan was held to fall short of legal requirements in several respects. "Principal among these," said the Fifth Circuit. "is the fact that even as to those grades which, under the plan, have actually become `desegregated' there is no true substance in the alleged desegregation." 364 F. 2d at 901. Only 39 Negro students, less than two-tenths of one per cent of the total, had been attending the otherwise all-white schools. There is thus an ample factual and legal basis for a finding under the Title VI Regulation that the Tate County plan has not been operating adequately In terms of student desegregation. In this connection, however, Senator Stennis further asks what evidence there can he of discrimination in the administration of Tate's free choice plan. referring to the "unknown motives" of all students who chose "to remain at their accustomed schools." This part of the question also has key legal aspects. The Tate County School System continues to maintain virtually unchanged the segregated faculties of the dual school structure. Only two of 144 staff members are serving in desegregated assignments full-time. with part-time de- se~re~ated assignments no more significant. Otherwise, the indicia of the dual school structure remain virtually unaffected tinder the administration of Tate County's desegregation plan. There has been no effective assumption by the local officials of their constitutional responsibility to eliminate illegal segregation. How-ever valid a free choice plan may he in the abstract, the choice of schools cannot he said to be truly free as long as the school system continues to designate its various schools as actually intended for students of one race or the other by the maintenance of completely or almost completely segregated faculties, con- trary to constitutional reouirements. In consjclerin~ the continuing discriminatory impact on students under a free choice plan resultinr from the school district's failure to make progress in faculty de~e~re'ation. the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit has held: The ao'e old distinction of "white schools" and "Negro schools" must he erasorl. The continuation of such distinctions only perpetrates [sic] in- ecinnlitv of educational onnortunitv and places in jeopardy the effective oporat~on of the entire "freedom of choice" tyne plan. Clark v. Board of Fd~cation of tlic T~ittTe Rock ~choo7 fljstr~ct, Civil Action No. 18.368 (8th Cir. December 15.1966') (Slip opinion. p.14'). PAGENO="0857" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS 1679 It is true that in the Clai* case the court denied the plaintiffs' request that continuation of the free choice plan be ruled unconstitutional on the ground of inadequate progress in student desegregation. The court noted that the fiee choice method "has been tentatively accepted by this and other courts as well as the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare . . ." but added that this is not to say free choice "may not be cast aside by the courts" if it does not result in meeting constitutional requirements (slip opinion, p. 5). The court indicated it would not rely conclusively on statistics showing the degree of student de- segregation, for "the mere presence of statistics indicating absence of total inte- gration does not render an otherwise proper plan unconstitutional" (slip opinion, p. 8). The court found that the number of Negro students in formerly all-white schools had more than doubled, from 621 in 1965 to 1,360 in 1966, or 19% of the total, and ruled that this constituted adequate progress as far as student de- segregation was concerned. The advice given the Tate County district as to the inadequacy of its plan seems entirely consistent with the reasoning and holding in the Davis and Clark cases. Tate was not asked to abandon free choice or reach any fixed degree of student desegregation, but only advised that further steps must be worked out to make more adequate progress. In the meantime, there remains virtually unaffected the racial discrimination inherent in the dual school structure. THE RELEVANCE OF FACULTY ASSIGNMENTS IN DETERMINING COMPLIANCE WITH TITLE VI Senator Stennis next discusses § 604 of the Act, which prohibits action under Title VI "with respect to any employment practice . . . except where the primary objective of the Federal financial assistance is to provide employment." He also refers to a provision of Title VII of the Act. In the administration of that Title, under § 703(j), no preferential treatment may be required of any employer be- ~iise of any racial "imbalance" in the makeup of his staff as compared with the racial makeup of the population in his community or its available work force. The Senator concludes that under these provisions the racial Composition of a school system's faculty has no bearing on its compliance w-ith Title VI. and asks what other legal authority there can be for considering the assignment of teach- ers and staff. By the terms of Title VII itself (~ 701(b)), the employees of a school system are excluded from the reach of the requirements of Title VII for nondiscrimina- tory employment practices. Accordingly, no provision of Title VII respecting racial discrimination or racial imbalance in employment, whether permissive or prohibitive, can have any application to a school district's faculty members. If it were possible to maintain segregated faculties without a racially dis- criminatory impact on students. § 604 might be held to preclude any considera- tion of faculty assignments under Title VI. Providing fur the employment of teachers is not the primary objective of any class of Federal financial assistance extended to school districts, and so the exception within i 604 does not apply. The primary objective of all assistance to schools is to benefit the students in the system, not the teachers. Therefore § 604, if it could be taken by itself, might be construed to preclude consideration of the faculty assigniiioiit practices of school districts. But § 604 cannot be read apart from the general nondiscrimination policy enunciated in § 601. When read as part of Title VI, § 604 can only have the very restrictive meaning considered above if it is assumed that maintaining segregated faculties has no discriminatory impact on students. But the students, as the primary beneficiaries of Federal assistance to school districts, must be protected from racial discrimination if the basic purpose of Title VI. as expressed in § 601, is to be carried out. And the courts have repeatedly held that the racial alloca- tion of staff must be considered in determining whether pupils are subjected to cli-~crimination in the schools. Several of the key court decisions to this effect are mentioned on pages 9 and 10 of the Senator's letter. These and other cases on faculty desegregation are re- ferred to below in commenting on additional points in this connection raised by the Senator on those pages. It should be sufficient here for the purpose of clarification of the present question to state that the problem of reallocating staff was one of the reasons mentioned twelve years ago by time Supreme Court for permitting the desegregation process to take place over a period of time. v. Roar~1 of Thfueation. 349 U.S. 294. 301 (1955). PAGENO="0858" 16S0 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS By the time the Civil Rights Act was being debated nine years later, the courts were beginning to require positive steps toward reallocation of staff as a part of school desegregation plans, where this had not already been achieved voluntarily. Senator Humphrey cited one such case, Bra xton v. Board of Public instruction of Duval County, 326 F. 2d 616 (5th Cir. 1~64) in commenting on the effect of Title VI on public schools: {T]he Commissioner might also be justified in requiring elimination of racial discrimination in employment or assignment of teachers, at least where such discrimination affected the educational opportunities of children. 110 Cong. Rec. 6545 (19641. This was prior to the inclusion of § 604 in the bill. When it came to be dis- cussed. Senator Humphrey stated that § 604 "is in line with the provisions of Section 602 lwhich effectuates the policy of § 601] and serves to spell out more precisely the declared scope of coverage of the Title." 110 Cong. Bee. 12720. Elsewhere in the same speech he stated, "We have made no changes of substance in Title VI." 110 (l'ong. Bee. 12714. It seems clear, then, that § 604 was not intended to exempt school districts from meeting requirements for faculty de- segregation. as such desegregation bears on the rights of students, in demonstrat- ing eligibility for coiitinued Federal thiancial assistance under the nonthscrim- ination requirements of § 601. 4. LACK OF PRESIDENTIAL APPROVAL UNDER § 602 OF THE SCHOOL DESEGREGATION GUIDELINES The fourth area of concern expressed in the Senator's letter relates to the validity of the Statement of Policies or "guidelines" for school desegregation plans under Title VI. issued by the Office of Education. Senator Stennis ex- presses the view that under § 602 of the Act, the guidelines are not valid without specific Presidential approval. Each Federal department and agency is required by § 602 to effectuate the nondiscrimination policy of § 601 by issuing "rules, regulations, or orders of general applicability." which, it is specified, will not become effective "unless and until approved by the President." This Department's Regulation was issued as required by § 602 with the approval of the President, and it became Part 80 of Title 45, Code of Federal Regulations. This is the regulation of general applica- bility contemplated by § 602. It sets forth, among other things. substantive non- discrimination requirements in § S0.3 and prescribes methods of compliance with these requirements in § 80.4. all to demonstrate eligibility for Federal financial assistance. Lnder § 50.4 a sy~tern of pre-grant assurances of nondiscrimination is set up. This arrangenient was designed. among other things, to obviate the need that would prOl)ably otherw-ise arise for a J)re-grant review of the practices of an applicant for any class of assistance available from the Department. Such a sys- tem of assurances is in accordance with Congressional understanding of suitable rule-making by Federal agencies under § 602. See the statements by Senator Pastore at 110 Cong. Rec. 7059 (1964) and Senator Ribicoff, id. at 7066. Under the Regulation. the typical method of assuring compliance with the requirements of § 80.3 is set out in §80.4(a). An assurance of full and immedi- ate compliance with § 80.3 is clearly contemplated, and the vast majority of all applicants for assistance from this Department have appropriately filed such as- surances. including over 23.000 public school districts throughout the Nation. Such assurances are almost always provided by filing HEW Form 441. issued for the purpose by the responsible Department officials, including the Commis- sioner of Education, in accordance with § 80.4(a). In preparinr the Regulation. how-ever, it was recognized that a small minority of public school districts, less than 10~~ of the Nation's total, were not in a posi- tion to file the standard assurance of full and immediate compliance wIth the nondiscrimination requirements under the Act. These are the districts that have not eliminated the racial discrimination resulting from operating a dual struc- ture of schools for students of different races. At the time the Act was passed, such districts were found almost exclusively in only 17 States, and constituted less than half the total number of school districts even in those States. Although it was realized that these relatively few school systems could not meet the generally applicable nondiscrimination requirements under the Act, it was the Congressional understanding that they w'ould nevertheless be eligible for Federal assistan(es "if reasonable steps were being taken in good faith to end PAGENO="0859" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1681 unconstitutional segregation." See Senator Humphrey's statement at 110 Cong. Ree. 6545-6546 (1964). Accordingly, provision was made in the generally applica- ble Regulation whereby the nondiscrimination requirements of § S0.3 would be deemed satisfied for such districts as became subject to final court orders of desegregation (now about 200) and those that submitted adequate voluntary de- segregation plans (about 1750 voluntary plans are now in effect, although not all are considered to be operating adequately). Under § 80.4(c) of the Regulation, the Secretary, with the approval of the President, assigned the responsibility for evaluating school districts' desegrega- tion plans to the Commissioner of Education. Under § 80.4(c) (2), the Commis- sioner is empowered and required to review voluntary plans to determine and redetermine whether they are "adequate to accomplish the purposes of the Act." The wisdom of this arrangement was early acknowledged by the Fifth Circuit. In Singleton v. Jackson Municipal Separate School District, 348 F.2d 729, 731 ~ith Cir. 1065) the court said. [T]he United States Office of Education is better qualified than the courts and is the more appropriate federal body to weigh administrative difficulties inherent in school desegregation plans." Under § 80.12(b) of the Regulation, the Commissioner is also directed, as responsible Department official, to issue to interested persons "forms and detailed instructions and procedures" for effectuating the Regulation, which provision is quoted by Senator Stennis. Pursuant to this provision, and mindful of his re- sponsibilities under § 80.4(c) (2), the Commissioner issued, shortly after the Regulation became effective, a leaflet with the (short) title "Instructions to School Districts Regarding Compliance with Title VI." This document explained the form of assurance of full and immediate compliance expected from the great majority of all districts, hut it also set out, for the guidance of the relatively few districts involved, the general criteria the Commissioner would apply in making determinations as to the adequacy of voluntary desegregation plans under § 80.4(c) (2). School officials in most of those districts not in a position to assure full and immediate compliance felt the need for more detailed guidance, however, in formulating desegregation plans that would be considered adequate. This need led first to the circulation of an unofficial memorandum on school desegregation law by an outside expert, and then, in April of 1965, to the issue of the Commis- sioner's own "General Statement of Policies" for school desegregation plans, which became known as the "guidelines." The publication of the guidelines assisted many districts to draw up accept- able plans, but many others asked for still further guidance. The Commissioner then circulated two complete model desegregation plans, substantially ready for signature by individual districts. One model plan was based on free choice of schools and the other on the adoption of a single set of nonracial attendance z~nes. Both were in conformance with the applicable policies of the guidelines. These plans were a(lopted by a number of districts and promptly accepted by the Commissioner. Altogether some 1050 voluntary plans were accepted under the Regulation for the 1965-66 school year as "adequate to accomplish the purposes of the Act." In i'eviewing the results of the first year of operation of these plans, it was found that in many districts with voluntary plans little or no progi'es~ in deseg- regation had been made. It became apparent that all plans would have to be modified in some respects for the following school year. The Comniissioner con- suited over a period of months on the various problem areas with State and local school officials, outside experts on school desegregation law, and attorneys of this Department and of the Justice Department. This thorough review led ultimately to the issue of the "Revised Statement of Policies." or revised guidelines, for the guidance of school districts in amend- ing their desegregation plans so that they might be considered adequate for the 1066-67 school year. A simplified amending process was arranged, so that school districts could assure their compliance with the policies and procedures of the revised guidelines by filing a printed form. HEW Form 441-B. The revised guidelines include or improve on most of the provisions of the previous model plans, and provide indications of the general order of progress normally expected in both student and staff desegregation for plans to continue to be considered adequate. No fixed quotas or standards for progress are im- posed, however, as study of the various provisions shows. The revised guide- lines also reflect changed judicial standards for desegregation plans as expressed in more recent court decisions. PAGENO="0860" 16S2 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDITCATION AMENDMENTS It is this document. the revised guidelines, which Senator Stennis believes legally invali(l because not approved by the President under § 602 of the Act. As the above a flat ysis of' their origin and application shows. the guidelines are not "i'ules. regulations. or orders" within the meaning of § 602. The guidelines are a statement of policies which the Commissioner has issued to fulfill his respon- sibilities. under the Presidentally-approved Regulation, to assist dual-structure districts in fornuilating steps to remain eligible for Federal financial assistance. This policy statement reflects the factors the Commissioner considers in making the determinations as to the adequacy of voluntary plans which it is his duty to make under the Presidentially-approved Regulation. The guidelines then. are not intended to be and do not constitute a rule, regu- lation. or order as these terms are used in § 602 of the Act. There is thus no requirement for Presidential approval. The guidelines constitute a statement of policies issued pursuant to § 80.12(b) and in connection with § 80.4(c) (2) of the generally applicable and Presidentially-approved Regulation. From the debate in the house on the amendment requiring Presidential ap- proval of regulations under Title VI, it is clear that only rules, regulations or orders of general applicability were intended to be subject to Presidential ap- provaL See the colloquy between Congressman Lindsay. Congressman Smith of Virginia. and Congressman Poff at 110 Cong. Rec. 2499-2~S00 (1964). Congress- man Lindsay concluded this exchange by stating. "If it is not a rule. regulation. or order of general applicability, I would assume that the President would not have to put his approval on it." And Senator Humphrey had stated that it was "wise to leave the agencies a good deal of discretion" in operating under Title VI. See 110 Cong. Rec. t3~S45 (1964). An understanding is indicated here that implementing documents of lesser stature than such rules, regulations and orders would he issued. and that such documents would not require Presidential approval. As is shown above, docu- ments of this nature. e.g., "forms and detailed instructions and procedures", such as the guidelines, are specifically authorized by § 80,12(h) of the Presidentially- approved Title VI Regulation. Senator Stennis indicates on page of his letter a belief that the provisions of ~ 80.3 of the Regulation are less "extreme" than the guidelines, and he feels that ~ 80.3 cannot "support" the guidelines, which are "directly contrary" to the Regulation. The guidelines do not stem from § 80.3 at all. They are issued under § 80.4 (el (2) to have the effect of shielding those districts still in the process of de~egreg~ition from the immediate impact of the requirements for complete non- discrimination set out in § 80.3. including those provisions quoted in the Sen- ator's letter. Section 80.3 contemplates the complete absence of racial discrimination, in- cluding that resulting from operating a dual school structure. The guidelines afford those districts unable imniediately to comply with § 80.3 (that is, unable to eliminate completely the dual school structure overnight) a period of transition from the racial discrimination of the dual structure of schools to a single system of schools for all students. The guidelines thus cannot properly he considered more "extreme" than or "directly contrary" to the Regulation. Section 80.3 is in no way intended to "support" the guidelines. A school system operating under a plan confc,i'niing to the policies f the guidelines would probably fall far short of compliance with ~ 80.3. To put it another way. if a school system is in full compliance with i 80.3. it is in a position to file a Form 441 assurance, and does not need to operate under a plan leading toward such compliance. The Senator further states that the guidelines "require" the assignment of pupils "on the basis of race" in order to "achieve a certain percentage of inte- gration." w-hile the statute and Regulation "require that no distinctions based on race he made" in Federally assisted programs. The guidelines do not require the assignment of any particular student, or group of students. or number of students, to any particular school or schools, or to any type of types of schools. There is only one requirement in this con- nection for a determination of adequacy of a plan jy the Commissioner under ~ SO 1(ci (2i of the Regulation, which requirement is reflected in the guidelines. This requirement is that the racial basis of the assignment of students must be completely ended. and that the several schools among which students may choo~e. or to which they may he assigned by the district must he rendered no hcii~er identifiahie as icing intended for students of a particular race, especially on the basis of the composition of the faculty. PAGENO="0861" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 16S3 This requirement reflects the view, expressed in the quotation riven above from the Clark case, and in other cases referred to below, that neimlier the Constitu- tion nor Title VI is satisfied by extending students a free' choice between a school with a segregated Negro faculty and a school with a segregated white faculty. Beyond this, however, there is no other requirement respecting student assignments. There does remain the expectation under a free choice plan that as the choice is made increasingly free, by steps toward the desegregatiomi of faculty and other means, the choice procedures will result in significant increases in student desegregation, If such does not occur, a complete review of the oper- ation of the plan may lead to a determination that the plan is not operating adequately to accomplish the purposes of the Act, and that further steps to make more adequate progress are called for. A study of the guidelines, particularly of § 181.54, shows that the relative per- centage examples of the order of progress in student desegregation that "would normally be expected" are provided to show the "criteria" by which the Com- missioner "will, in general, be guided" in the process of "scheduling free choice iflans for review." There are no fixed percentage requiremen~~, but only some rough yardsticks for assessing the general extent of progress. Moreover, the general requirement is not that assignments be made on the basis of race, but that the making of such assignments be ended, along with the racial identifiability of the schools. There are, of course, situations in which race must be taken into account in order to meet constitutional and statutory nondiscrimination requirements, such as when faculty assignments and reassign- nients are being planned to correct the effects of past discriminatory assignments. The Fourth Circuit has held When school authorities, recognizing the historic fact that existing condi- tions are based on a design to segregate the races, act to undo these illegal conditions-especially conditions that have been judicially condemned_their effort is not to be frustrated on the ground that race is not a permissible consideration. This is not the "consideration of race" which the Constitu- tion discountenances. Wanner v. County &`ltooi Board of Arlington County, 357 F.2d 452, 454 (4th Cir. 1966). Further in his discussion of the validity of the guidelines, Senator Stennis asks why the guidelines are not applied "uniformly throughout the country." lie wonders what "unique problems would be encountered in requiring school districts beyond the South to submit the same reports and meet the same percentages of integration," and why a quoted portion of one of the provisions of the guidelines respecting transportation could not similarly be applied across the country. To the extent that dual-structure districts are found throughout the country, the guidelines generally apply, although in the one case encollutered thus far outside the South, much more rapid elimination of the dual system was agreed upon than that provided for by the guidelines. But within the 17 Southern and Border States the guidelines are now applicable to only about 1,750 districts of roughly 5000*. An attempt to apply the guidelines to the many bi-racial districts, in those same States, which have completely eliminated the dual school struc- ture, and to the thousands of bi-racial districts in other States which never have had a dual structure, would raise serious problems indeed. In almost all such districts, so far as is presently known, whatever segregation is now found in the schools usually results from housing patterns, population density and the natural or other topographic factors influencing the drawing of school attendance zones. While the guidelines do not require any fixed per- centage of student desegregation, contrary to the Senator's understanding, if the Commissioner were to apply to a single-structure district, North or South, even the rough measures for gauging desegregation progress in dual-structure dis- ti'icts that the guidelines provide, this would not be consistent with the intent of Congress. The statements by Senator Humphrey referred to above and th& provisions of section 407(a) of the Act combine to cast serious doubt as to the scope of the authority Congress intended the executive and judiciary branches t& *~ome 2~O of those districts filing voluntary plans In 19B~-OO have since complpte(l the tr'insition to a single system of schools for all students, and are considered in compithn~ with so a of the Regulation. In Delaware and Kentucky. tile (11011 5(h01)l sV5tcni has l,eeit virtnallv eliminated this year. and very substantial steps tn~varl this goal were takeim in Maryland. Tennessee and Oklahoma. A number of districts iii otlni' Soiitlit'rn States have taken such steps. PAGENO="0862" 1684 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS have under the Act to deal with problems of fortuitous de facto racial isolation. Under the Act and Regulation, how-ever, the Commissioner has authority for his requirement that all school districts provide reports on the racial composition of their schools. with respect to both students and faculty, and there is likewise authority for the program to secure the elimination of any practices found in single-structure districts under which students are subjected to discrimination prohibited by the Act. But with regard to purely de facto segregation, even the courts are not in agreement as to the requirements under the Constitution in such cases. As the discussion above shows, the Bell case holds that a school board has no duty to desegregate as long as it did not deliberately bring about segregation in the first place. A number of other cases, however, hold squarely to the contrary. See especially Barksdale v. Springfield. School Committee, 237 F.Supp. 543 (D. Mass. 1965), vacated 348 F.2d 261 1st Cir. 1965). See also Wright, "Public School Desegregation: Legal Remedies for De Facto Segregation," 40 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 285 (1965) and Fiss. "Racial Imbalance in the Public Schools: The Constitutional Concepts." 78 Harv. L. Rev. 564 (1965). The game considerations apply to the Senator's question with respect to trans- portation. The particular provision of the guidelines he quotes is from §181.51, which is intended to inhibit any limitations on free choice that might arise from lack of transportation in a district undergoing desegregation to eliminate the dual ~tru(ture of schools. To apply such a policy in a single-structure bi-racial district would pre-suppose first that the district had adopted, or could and should be iequirecl to adopt, an open enrollment policy backed by a transportation pro- gram to support it. There is nothing definitive in constitutional, statutory or case law' that would require such policies, and there is considerable authority to. the effect that a school district cannot be required to adopt them. It has been held. however, that school boards do not lack the authority to adopt such policies on their ow-n initiative, and some State statutes require them to do so. In any event. ~inrle-structure districts do not have the dual bus systems commonly found in tho~e districts still operating substantially under the dual structure, where some students are often bussed away from their neighborhoods or past nearby schools to more distant segregated schools. Senator Stennis goes on to consider certain provisions of both the 1965 and 1966 guidelines, and concludes that they "constitute a discriminatory applica- tion of the law." He cites a statement by Senator Pastore commenting on the rules and regulations to be promulgated pursuant to §602, in which Senator Pastore said such rules must be the same for Rhode Island as for Mississippi. ilOCorig.Rec. 7059 (1964). Senator Stennis here questions those provisions of the original and revised zuidelines relating to the filing of full and immediate assurances of compliance. The Senator is concerned because he believes these provisions to mean that school districts in the South were not or are no longer permitted to file HEW Form 441, the assurance of compliance provided under §80.4(a) of the Regulation to ef- fectuate the non-discrimination requirements of §80.3. Such is not the case. Almost 2.800 districts in the 17 Southern and Border State~ filed 441 assurance forms in 1965 which were accepted as the proper basis for extending Federal assistance. A fair number of these, although not a major- ity. were bi-racial districts that had previously completely eliminated all charac- teristics of the dual school structure. They have since been joined by some 200 other districts. w-hich implemented desegregation plans in 1965-66 or 196E3-f~7 that brought about the complete elimination of the indicia of the dual school structure. This is the ultimate goal and purpose of all acceptable desegregation plan~. and the Office of Education should continue to encourage and assist school districts to achieve this goal expeditiously. Both the original and revised guidelines constitute statements of policy on voluntary school desegregation plans. Accordingly, only brief reference is made in the berinning of each (Part III of the 1965 guidelines and §181.5 of the 1966 ~uicleline~) to ~chnol systems without the dual structure. While these references mcv tl11'~ have led to some confusion, the full policies and requirements respect- ma reaiilar assuranceS of compliance are set out in the Regulation, and in ex- planatory material issued concerning Form 441. If tlio~o policies and requirements are understood. it is hard to see how the Title VT Beaulation can he considered less than "broad in scope" or in any other way out of conformity with the understanding expressed in Senator Pastore's PAGENO="0863" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1685 quoted remarks. The assurance provisions do apply equally to Mississippi as to Rhode Island. When a school district in Mississippi eliminates all charac- teristics of the unconstitutional dual structure of schools, as at least one or two in Mississippi appear to have done thus far, and as a number of districts in neighboring States have done, then such district will be subject to the same policies and requirements as the 3,000-odd single-structure districts in the South and the 20.000 or more such districts elsewhere in the Nation. And where dual- structure districts are still found, North or South, each is afforded a period of transition to reach the stage when it can be fully in compliance with §001 of the Act and §80.3 of the Regulation, and may properly file a Form 441 assurance to replace its plan. This arrangement does not Constitute a (liscriminatory appli- cation of the law, nor does it involve applying the Act (lifferentlv in (lifferelit parts of the country, as the Senator suggests. 5. GENERAL DEGREE OF PROGRESS IN STUDENT AND STAFF DESEG}IE(L~TION THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED ADEQUATE TO ACCOMPLISH TIlE PURPOSES (E THE ACT Senator Stennis next raises a series of questions concerning the principles on which a determination as to the adequacy of a plan is based. FIis questions concern not only such principles as are applicable to the particular situation in Tate (`ounty but also those principles commonly applied in other cases. The Senator indicates that his questions in this connection arise in part because of statements iiiade in the letter of September 16, 1966 to Superintendent Walker of the Tate County School District. The pertinent sentences in this letter, parts of ~vliirh are quoted in the Senator's letter, are as follows (hi the basis of these anticipated faculty and student assignments reported hy you, we do not believe that your desegregatioii plan, as it has operated thus far, can reasonably be considered adequate to accomplish the purposes of the Civil Rights Act. . . . Your school board should coI1Sider u-hat acidi- tional steps it could take in order to make adequate progress in both student and staff desegregation for 1966-67. As the Senator is aware, a number of other school districts in Mississippi and other States received similar letters. These districts had generally reached only the same small degree of progress in student and staff desegregation as Tate County. To understand the reasons for reaching the conclusion that such small progress is not adequate for 1966-67, the basic purpose of every acceptable desegregation plan under Title VI must be borne in mind. The purpose of each such plan is to bring about the transition from the unconstitutional dual structure of schools for students of different races to a single system of unsegregated schools for all students. Such a plan is not intended to operate indefinitely, because its basic function is only to prescribe the policies and procedures used in the assignment and reassignment to schools of both students and faculty during tile transitional period. With these facts in mind, it can readily he seen that for a plan to be considered operating adequately it must result in significant progress from one school year to the next in both student and staff desegregation. These policies and expecta- tions are reflected in the various provisions of the guidelines. But the guidelines do not. contrary to the Senator's understanding. "establish certain graduated quotas of integration, expressed in terms of percentage transfers, which must he met." As pointed out above, the transfer percentages given in the rui(lehines are provided, as the exact wording of § 1S1.~4 shows, as examples of the `criteria" liv which "the Commissioner will, in reneral lie guided" in "sche(luliflg free choice plans for review." A plan is likely to be scheduled for review- on the basis of inadequate progress in student desegregation, and the district thereafter required to take additional steps, one of which might he to reopen the choice period and to provide additional faculty deserregation. only if there is "sub- stantial deviation" from the general order of progress that "would normally he expected" under the percentare examples. Moreover. heforp requiring that Iditional steps be taken, the Commissioner will consider not only the choices actually made but "other available evidence" tending to show- that the nion is or i~ not operating fairly or effectively. Such other evidence would include, as the third pararraph of § 1Sl.~4 indicates. such factors as community support for the plan, the efforts of the sollool system to eliminate the identifiability of schools on the basis of race. PAGENO="0864" 16S6 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS color, or national origin by virtue of the c inposition of staff or other factors, and the progress actually made in eliminating past discrimination and segregation. N action has been taken by the General Counsel toward the termination of Federal financial assistance to the Tate County Schools. The files show that the Tate plan has not at this time been scheduled for review. The small size of the staff, and the fact that a Iluml)er of other districts have made eveii less progress than Tate. have thus far made it not feasible to do more than advise this district that its progress is not considered adequate. and that it should on its own initiative take additional steps to make further progress in both student and staff desegregation. It is believed, however, that the Office of Education will schedule Tate Cuntys plan for a full review in the near future. The Senators question as to what progress in faculty desegregation would be considered adequate for l9tb-67 can best be answered by reference to § 181.13 of the guidelines. Several alternative patterns of staff assignments are provided in ~ul section d) . as examples of what adequate steps to initiate staff desegrega- timi might include. From these examples, as the Office of General Counsel and the ( fitice of Education have explained to the 5(11001 officials concerned, there elmierges a general minimum rule-of-thumb. This is that school (histricts are generally expected to arrange for at least such a number of present or new irfessional personnel to serve in desegregated situations, in one or more schools, as would roughly equal the number of schools in the system. The appropriateness of § 181.13 of the guidelines is reflected in the Clerk case referred to above. The court held that the desegregation of the staff should have he~un "many years ago", and that "accelerated and positive action" is now required. Such action, the court ruled. must include not only implementing nndi~riminatorY hirinz. assignment, transfer and dismissal practices. but ai'~o "all additional positive commitments necessary to bring about some measure of racial balance in time staffs of the individual schools in the very near future." Slip opinion, p.1~, 14. This decision reflects substantially the sanie principles as those of the guidelines, except that the guidelines do not require any form of "racial balance", either f students or staff. as a thoughtful reading will reveal. As applied to a nine-school system like Tate County, the rule-of-thumb mini- mum for 19(16-07 would call for a total of eight or nine staff members serving in desegregated situations. The school system reported anticipated desegre- gate(l assignments w-ith a full-time equivalent of at most four staff members, including only two on a full-time basis. Additional desegregated assignments for four or five more staff members would normally be considered to constitute adequate progress in faculty desegregation for 1966-67 for a system like Tate under the minimum rule-of-thumb. but the rule-of-thumb figures would lie weighed with all other relevant factors in making a definite determination as to the adequacy of progress under the desegregation plan. senator Stennis has further specific questions in this connection. He asks. "What percentage of integration effectively desegregates a school? What ratio of white students to colored students must be achieved in order that the school may he considered desegregated, and what is the authority for this ratio?" Review of a de~egregatio11 plan focuses l)rimflnrily on the desegregation of the ~(hOOl sy~tenm rather thou the situatioli at any particular school or schools within it And no racial ratio of students within a single school is required or even ((n'qdered ~igimificammt : the important question is the general degree of progress in the transfer of studeimts from segregated schools iii the entire system. Because in most districts with free choice plans white students have not c1io-~en to attend s(.hoOls originally established for the segregated use of Negro ~tudeuts. time m~tli (1 f gauri pg progress mu~'t presen fly involve considering the extent to which Negro students have transferred to the schools formerly operated exclusively for white students. Accordingly, in response to the Sen- ator~ next question, the number of white students remaining in formerly all- white schools now attended by one or more Negro students is not considered particularly significant in terms of progress in student desegregation, at least riot where such Negro students constitute a small minority of the students in the schools. In the case of Tate County. the files show that the Office of Education has appropriately considered the degree to which Negro students have transferred from segregated schools to formerly all-white schools. but has properly not PAGENO="0865" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTTCATION AMENDMENTS 1687 considered the percentage of desegregation resulting at any individual school, and has not considered significant the extent to which white students in the system have been joined by a small minority of Negro students in the various schools originally established for white students only. The percentage of Negro students in Tate County having transferred remains less than one percent. The percentage examples provided in the guidelines suggest that had this figure been ten percent, or eight percent, or perhaps even six percent, such would have been considered adequate progress in student desegregation for 1966-67, depending on all other relevant factors, including at least to some extent the progress made in faculty desegregation. The per- centage examples merely reflect the degree of progress generally achieved in various districts where free choice procedures have proved effective iii bringing about the elimination of the dual structure of schools. Such has not been the case in Tate County. The Senator further asks, "If a school to which all applicants are freely admitted without regard to race is not considered desegregated, then how exact- ly is a desegregated school defined and identified~" Again, it is the desegregation of the school system that is most crucial, rather than the particular situations at the individual schools. A school system is considered (lesegregated if at- tendance at its schools is no longer based directly or indirectly on race. At present, where free choice results in significant progress in the desegregation of the system from one school year to the next, when viewed against the back- ground of the percentage examples provided in the guidelines, then such progress is considered adequate, in the process of transition to a single unsegregate(1 school system, to constitute a basis for the continued extension of Federal financial assistance. If one is to focus on the schools individually, however, a measure of progress can be reached in terms of the desegregation of the faculty. If in the particular community the staff of a given school were composed of such a group of w-hite and Negro teachers and staff members as left the school no longer identifiable as having been originally established for students of a particular race, then the most conspicuous badge of the illegal dual school structure would have been eliminated. The school system would be considered to have ended the discrimi- nation affecting students at that school that arose from segregated faculty as- signments, and to have taken the most significant step toward the full desegrega- tion of the school under its free choice plan. Based on the reports the Tate County officials have sumbitted. no single school in the Tate County system could he considered to have lost its racial identifiability to any significant degree. 6. POINTS RAISED IN CONNECTION WITH THE DEPARTMENT'S LEGAL MEMORANDUM OF MAY 20, 1966, ON THE AUTHORITY FOR THE GUIDELINES The remainder of Senator Stennis' letter is devoted to consideration of a num- ber of other legal questions and analysis of court cases in connection with the legal basis for the guidelines, with particular reference to the cases cited in the Department's memorandum of May 20. 1966 entitled "Authority for the 1966 School Desegregation Guidelines." This section of this memorandum takes up these remaining points in the order raised by the Senator, although some of them have been covered to such a degree in discussions above as should make reference thereto sufficient. The Senator's first point with respect to the May 20 memorandum is that the cases cited therein as supporting the guidelines were decided when the 1965 guidelines were in effect. not the revised guidelines to w-hich the memorandum relates, and these guidelines, he believes, are "altogether different" from those of 1965. The May 20 memorandum does not quote language from any case directly commenting on the guidelines at all, original or revised. As the Senator indi- cates, no case directly supporting the revised guidelines could be decided before they were issued. There are, however, several cases w-hich made highly favor- able comments on the 1965 guidelines, and decisions have been handed down in other cases since the May 20 memorandum with similar comments on tile revised guidelines. On the 1965 guidelines, see the following comments in these cases: "We attach great u-eight..." Singleton v. Jackson Mvnfripal Separate School District, 345 75-492---67--pt. 2-55 PAGENO="0866" 16SS ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS F.2d 729. 731 (5th Cir. 1965) ; "The applicable standard . . ." Price v. Denision Indcpendcnt School District, 348 F.2d 1010, 1014 (5th Cir. 1965) ; " . . . only minimum standards . . . we doubt that they would ever to be too high." Single- ton v. Jacl~son Jiunicipal Scparate School District, 355 F.2d 805, 869 (5th Cir. 1966) : ".... must he heavily relied upon" kemp v. Beasley, 352 F.2d 14, (8th Cir. 1965) : . . . entitled to serious judicial deference" Sntith v. Board of Edu- cation of ]Iorrilton. 365 F.2d 770. 780 (8th Cir. 1960). The Couft of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has not yet considered the guidelines, but district courts in that circuit have done so. See Kier v. County School Board of Augusta County, 249 F. Supp. 239 W.D. Va. 1900). and Wright v. County School Board of Grcensvillc County. 252 F. Supp. 378 (E.D. Va. 1966). Not as many decisions have yet considered the 1966 guidelines. However, in addition to the Jefferson County ease, mentioned at the beginning of this memorandum, which decision upholds all aspects of the revised guidelines, they have also received favorable comment twice in Miller v. Clarendom County ~rhool District iVo. 2. Civil Action No. 8752 (D. S.C. April 21. 1966 and June 14. 1966). Moreover, in both the Davis case (Mobile) mentioned above and the Smith case just cited, the revised guidelines were referred to in a favorable Context, although not specifically commented on. In any event, the 1966 guidelines cannot properly be considered "altogether different" from the original version. The 1905 guidelines clearly convey that (1) the purpose of any desegregation plan is to bring about the elimination of the dual structure of schools. (2) free choice plans are expected to promote the elimination of segregation, and (3) faculty desegregation must include both nonracial assignments of new personnel and reassignments of present person- nel. The revise(1 guidelines basically amplify these points, provide improved procedures. and give examples of what would be considered adequate progress in desegregation for 1966-67. It is true, of course, as Senator Stennis next points out, that in none of the cases passing on the guidelines have they been directly in issue in terms of their legal validity or whether any particular requirement thereunder was proper for the Office of Education to impose. The only exception to date is the Jefferson Countt~ case, in which a rehearing en bane is presently pending. But it is also true that in no case of which the Office of General Counsel is aware have the guidelines been considered illegal, invalid, or inappropriate. The guidelines are presently being challenged more or less directly in suits pending before various United States District Courts in Alabama, Arkansas, Florida. Georgia. Mississippi, and South Carolina. In none of these cases has even a preliminary decision on the guidelines been reached. However, the Office of General Counsel has assured school districts that if their particular district court or circuit court should hold in a final, unappealed decision, or if the Supreme Court should hold, that the Office of Education is without authority to impose a provision of the guidelines, then the Office of Education would of course not seek to enforce that provision. The Senator states that in each school desegregation case there were one or more individuals actively asserting that they had been denied admission at a particular school because of their race. He indicates that in cases where no one applies for admission to a school, the school should not be considered "guilty" by an unverified assumption of discrimination. It is correct that many school desegregation cases originated because of the denial by school boards of Negro students' requests for admission to white schools. It would not be correct to assume that in subsequent hearings, appeals or decisions in such cases, or in cases more recently brought, that this is the only issue. These cases are class action, and the individual plaintiff typically ask for and are granted class relief in the form of a desegregation plan, or an up- dated desegregation plan, or an order closing certain small segregated schools. or an order directing the desegregation of faculty, transportation or activities. The guidelines are drawn from and reflect such decisions. See, for example, rnitcd States v. Lowndes County Board of Education, Civil Action No. 2328-N (M.D. Ala. February 10, 1966). In that case, the parties having stipulated as to the facts, the court ordered 24 small schools closed, a new school opened on a nonsegregated basis. and a desegregation plan implemented containing provi- sions and procedures similar to those included in the revised guidelines (which were issued a month later). including provisions for the desegregation of PAGENO="0867" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1689 faculty, transportation and activities. This case was brought by the Attorney General pursuant to Title IV of the Act, upon written complaint from an ag- grieved parent of a student in the system seeking relief. One of the major purposes of the fund termination provisions of Title VI was to bring about voluntary eompliance with the requirements of the Constitution as interpreted and applied by the courts. See the general statements by Con- gres~inan Celler, at 110 Cong. Rec. 2467 (1964), and by Senator P:istore, id. at p. 7062. With respect to public schools. it was obviously intended to eacourage the voluntary desegregation of illegal dual school systems without the necessity of hundreds of additional court cases being brought by individuals, or by the Attorney General under Title IV. The Office of Education would therefore be failing to carry out the intent of Congress if it did not seek to have a full blown voluntary desegregation plan implemented in each dual-structure district. There is no indication in the legislative history of the Act that the Congress intended Federal funds to flow unconditionally to each dual-structure school district unless an(I until a Negro student applied for admission to a white school and was turned clown. Senator Stennis next refers to the Singleton (1966) decision and to Kemp as upholding free choice plans. As the quotations he gives show, free choice is considered permissible "at this stage in history" or "at this stage." But it would be incorrect to believe that it follows that a free choice plan will always meet constitutional requirements. As the quotation from the Clark case given above shows, free choice is only "tentatively accepted", and may be "cast aside by the courts" if it does not meet such requirements. The guidelines reflect the same view. Free choice is acceptable if it works to bring about reasonable progress in student desegregation from one school year to the next, but even then, because free choice is intended only to bring about a transition, it is not expected to be used indefinitely. In the sentence following that in which the court in Singleton~ said that free choice is acceptable at this stage, it is stated, "In the long run, it is hardly possible that schools will be administered on any such haphazard basis." 355 F.2d at 871. Senator Stennis next quotes from the majority opinion of the Fourth Circuit in Bradley v. School Board of the City of Richmond, 345 F.2d 310, 316 (4th Cir. 1965) to the effect that "a general intermixture of the races in the schools" is not required under the Constitution. It is believed that this quotation means no more than that "racial balance" in the schools may not be required. This language is interpreted by some, however, to mean that if no Negro student applies under free choice to attend a white school, and the schools remain totally segregated, the Constitution is nevertheless satisfied because the choice was offered. If this interpretation was intended, then it is in conflict with key statements of both the Fifth and Eighth Circuits. In the 1966 Singleton decision, the Fifth Circuit said: The Constitution forbids unconstitutional state action in the form of segregated facilities, including segregated public schools. School author- ities, therefore, are under the constitutional compulsion of furnishing a single integrated school system. Administrative problems may justify an orderly transitionary period during which the system may be desegregated several grades at a time. This has been the law since Brown v. Board of Education. Misunder- standing of this principle is perhaps due to the popularity of an over- simplified dictum that the Constitution "does not require integration." 355 F.2d at 869. In the Kemp case, the school board argued that as long as Negro students were not required to attend Negro schools their constitutional rights were not violated. The Eighth Circuit stated that it could not "accept the position ad- vanced by the Board", and pointed out that it was "logically inconsistent with Brown and subsequent decisional law on this subject." 352 F.2d at 21. Senator Stennis also quotes from Goss v. Board of Education, 373 U.S. 683 (1963). In that case, the Supreme Court ruled out a provision in a desegrega- tion plan based on nonracial attendance zones. Under this Irovision, a student had been permitted to transfer from his neighborhood school, if students of his race were in a minority there, to attend a school where students of hi~ race constituted a majority. This so-called "minority to majority" transfer rule had been typically used by white students to transfer out of nearby schools attended predominantly by Negro students, so that they might cross town to predom- PAGENO="0868" 16~)O ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS inantly or exclusively white schools. The court held that such a provision was contrary to the Constitution, but it indicated that if the transfers were made available to all without regard to race, and not limited by the racial composition of the schools transferred to or from, then the Constitution would be satisfied. This case is authority for that type of desegregation plan which establi~hes a single set of nonracial attendance zones for each school, on the basis of which all students are assigned subject to a right of free transfer at the student's option. The Go.s.s decision did not consider at all the adequacy of a free choice plan, with student assignments utterly dependent on choice, under which little or no student desegregation is achieved. The Suujlcton, Kemp, Bradlci~ and Goss cases, then, when reviewed in the light of the circumstances, are such that the provisions of the guidelines respect- ing the effectiveness of free choice plans are not contrary to these authorities, as the Senator suggests is the case. Moreover, the provisions of § 1S1.54 of the guidelines quoted on page 9 of this letter, concerning progress under free choice plans, and even the percentage examples themselves, are clearly reflected in the rulings of the Fifth and Eighth Circuits in the Davis and Clark cases. In Daris, less than one percent desegregation of Negro students led to a revised plan. In Clark, a plan was upheld under which the desegregation of Negro students had doubled to reach 19 percent. Moreover, the further provisions of the guidelines quoted by the Senator, authorizing a majority to minority transfer preference, are not contrary to the Goss case. In that case the court struck down a plan provision which inhibited desegregation, the minority to majority transfer preference. The quoted pro- visions of the guidelines, from § § 181.33(b) and 181.49, authorize school ills- triets in their discretion to enhance the process of desegregation by the opposite type of preference. If it be objected that such policies would improperly in- volve consideration of race, as the Senator suggests, then the holding of the Fourth Circuit in the Wanner case quoted earlier in this memorandum is ap- propriate. A majority to minority transfer preference is not the type of con- si(leratinn of race which the Constitution precludes, because the purpose of con- sidering race in such cases would be to help correct the effects of past uncon- stitutional racial discrimination. See Doweli v. ~ehooi Board of Oklahon?a (it~,'. 219 F. Supp. 427 (W.D. Okla. 1963). 244 F. Supp. 971 (W.D. Okia. 19B.V~, which was recently affirmed by the Tenth Circuit in its decision in Civil Action No. S~i23. January 23. 1967. In this leading case, the school system was ordered to provide a majority to minority transfer preference. Senator Stennis concludes his letter with a series of further questions con- cerning the validity of the policies of the Office of Education for faculty desegre- gation under the Act. stemming from his review of the May 20th memorandum. the cases cited therein, and other decisions cited by the Senator. The Senator first states that the Supreme Court has itself not yet ordered faculty desegregation implemented, but only held that plaintiffs in school de- segregation cases are "entitled to a hearing on the question of the relation be- tween faculty assignments and the adequacy of the desegregation plans." It is true that in reversing the refusal of the Fourth Circuit to consider faculty assignments in the Bradley case, the Supreme Court stated that: There is no merit to the suggestion that the relation between faculty allocation on an alleged racial basis and the adequacy of desegregation plans is entirely speculative. 382 P.S. 103. 10~ (19B~5). But in Roqers v. Paul. 382 ITS. 198 (19~.9). the other case cited by the sen- ator in this connection, the court was more direct in a decision handed down the same day as Bradley: Two theories would give students not yet in desegregated grades sufficient interest to challenge racial allocation of faculty: (1) that racial alloca- tion of faculty denies them equality of educational opportunity without regard to segregation of pupils: and (2) that it renders inadequate an otherwise constitutional pupil desegregation plan soon to be applied to their grades. (382 P.S. at page 200). The court then referred to the RradTey case and held that the plaintiffc~ here (who were students in grades not yet reached by the plan) had standing to challenge racial allocation of faculty under the first theory, and that they were improperly denied a hearing on this issue. These cases have been widely cited as authority for requiring prompt steps toward the desegregation of faculty. Wheeler v. Durham City Board of Edu- PAGENO="0869" ELEMENTARY AND SECONI)\RY EDFCATION ~MExDMENTs 16~'1 cat iou, 363 F.2d 73~ (4th Cir. 1966 is typical of such (ase~. In W1~ ecler, tile Fourth Circuit, after noting that the evidentiary hearing calle(l for by Bradleit hal been held in the district court, had this to say about the Bradley decision We read the decision as authority for the proposition that renioval of race considerations from facuity seiection and allocation is, as a matter of law, an in.~eparable and indispc,i-~ablc command. wit/i lU f/ic abolition of pupil segregation in public schools as pronounced in Brown v. Board of Education [italic added] (363 F.2d at "40). In no case, it appears, has an eviclentiary hearing been held under Bradley which resulted in a finding that the racial allocation of faculty does not subject students to discrimination. in fact, in many cases the courts, seemingly seeing the conclusion of discrimination as inescapable, have apparently not found hear- ings on the question necessary in order to require steps implemented to deseg- regate faculty, but consider this required "as a matter of law." If this is so. it must be that defendant school boards have not demanded such hearings in order to fight or delay faculty desegregation orders. From the decisions in singleton, Ken?p. 9 rig/it, and Kier cases, for example, the cases next referred to by Senator Stennis, which are all cited above, it is not clear that such hearings were held. But tile senator refers to these cases, which were among those cited in the May 20 memorandum, primarily to point out that they are all cases in which the courts "exercised their inherent powers of equity" in enforcing constitutional provisions. Tile ~unator's Position is that a Federal administrator, such as the Commissioner of Education, has no inherent powers of equity, and "must find the authority for all his acts and orders in the statute which he administers." This position is generally sound. But the Commissioner does find authority in Title VI for his acts in formulating faculty desegregation policies to be applied in determining eligibility for Federal financial assistance. In reviewing progress in faculty desegregation, and finding that ~~me districts are making adequate progress and others are not, the Commissioner may be acting somewhat akin to a district court exercising equity powers in applying constitutional standards to determine faculty desegregation requirements in particular cases. To the extent that this is so, it is because the Commissioner must exercise this kind of discretion under i ~0.4(c) (2) of tile Presidentially-approved Regulation is- sued by the Department as required by ~ 602 of tile Act. If the Commissioner lacked discretion somewhat analogous to that of the courts in such cases, then he could not consider any (lesegregation plan to con- stiti~te a basis for extending Federal financial assistance under § 601. He would be obliged to move to terminate assistance to all dual-structure districts that did not succeed in eliminating the dual-structure indicia virtually overnight. Only tile requirements of i 50.3 could he applied, and 110 gra(lualisnl would be available under § 80.4(c) (2). It is clear that if there is to he any gradualism. then some appropriate officer must llave tile power to evaluate the gradual prog- ress it produces. Otherwise the intent of the Congress would he defeated. Senator Humphrey stared as follows: The Commissioner of Education would he warranted in relying on any existing plans of desegregation which appeared adequate and effeetire It is not expected that funds would he cut off so long as reasonable steps were being taken in good faith to end unconstitutional segregation. [Italic added] 110 Cong. Rec. 6545 (1964). Later in the same speech he said, "Depending on the circumstances. Federal courts have approved plans of progressive desegregation . . ." Id. at 6546. The inference is plain that he would expect the Commissioner's actions under Title VI to depend on the circumstances in each case, to determine whether a district had a "plan of progressive desegregation" w-hich was "adequate and effective." anT whether "reasonable steps were being taken" under it "to end unconstitu- tional segregation." Like all administrative actions, the Commissioner's must he reasonable and not capricious. In the context both of the practical situation and of Senator Humphrey's statements, it would have been ureasonabie for the Commissioner to disregard the evolving hody of judicial opinion in tIlls area. That this body of om'inion is in fact faithfully reflected in the policies of the guidelines, and in the actions taken under their provisions, is supported. it is believed, by the cast's cited and analysis provided in this memorandum. PAGENO="0870" 1692 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS It should be added that a number of key decisions involving consideration of faculty desegregation were handed down before either the 1966 or the 1985 guide- lines were prepared, some of them even before the passage of the Act. See Lila pp v. Board of Education. City of Chattanooga~, 319 F. 2d 571 (6th Cir. 1963) Xorth cross v. Board of Education, City of Memphis, 33 F. 2d 661 (6th Cir. 1964) ; Jackson v. School Board, City of Lynchburg, 321 F. 2d 230 (4th Cir. 1964) : Augustus v. Board of Public Instruction, Escambia County, 306 F. 2d 862 (5th Cir. 1962) ; Brawton v. Board of Public Instruction of Duval County, 326 F. 2d (116 (5th Cir. 1964) ; and Christmas v. Board of Instruction of Harford County. 231 F. Supp. 331 (D.C. Md. 1964). This listing is not exhaustive. Among the more significant of the decisions handed down since the May 20 memorandum that concerns faculty desegregation are the Clark and Dowell de- cisions in the Eighth and Tenth Circuits. In both cases the school districts were ordered to bring about the elimination of the racial identifiability of schools arising from the racial composition of their faculties, on the same principles as those expressed in the guidelines. A district court in the Sixth Circuit has Just followed these same principles and ordered a series of specific steps promptly implemented to bring about the transfers and new assignments of personnel necessary to eliminate the racial identifiability of schools. See Robinson V. Shclh!l County Board of Education, Civil Action No. 4916 (W.D. Tenn. January 19. 1967). Senator Stennis' final concern in this connection is that the May 20 memoran- duin cites only a letter from the Attorney General to Senator Cooper as authority for "flying in the face of the plain language of Section 604" of the Act by requir- ing steps toward faculty desegregation in each plan. The letter in question appears at 110 Cong. Rec. 10076 (1964). In it the At- torney General explained that § 602 would generally not cover an employer (not "employee :" the Senator's letter has what is apparently a typographical error hero) receiving Federal aid who discriminates in his employment practices. In order to make this clear, the Senate added § 604 to the bill. The limited application of this provision has been pointed out in an earlier lortion of this memorandum. The exception it provides was intended to cover sitiu~tions where those subjected to discrimination are not the beneficiaries of the Federal assistance involved. Such is the example cited in the Attorney General's letter, where the farmer need not adhere to nondiscrimination policies in em- ploying farm hands because they are not the beneficiaries of the Federal assist- ance extended to the farmer. It is true that the Attorney General did not specifically refer to school faculties as presenting a different case. as the Senator notes, probably because no one had thought of exc:ipting school systems from requirements to eliminate the sub- jection of stuclerits to discrimination that is inherent in maintaining segregated fadulties.* Nothing has been found in any portion of the legislative history of Title VI, including § 604. which shows that any part of the intent of Congress was to authorize Federal assistance to school districts that failed to comply with such requirements for faculty desegregation. If it had been intended to reverse an understanding already arrived at. and to carve out a major exception from the broad nondiscrimination purposes of i 601. surely some explicit statement to that effect would have been made. For prior to the addition of § 604. it was the clear understanding that the Commissioner would be justified in requiring elimination of racial allocation of faculty where it affected educational opportunities of students, as the courts hold it does. See Senator Humphrey's statement to this effect at 110 Cong. Rec. 6545 (1964). in which he cited the Brarton case referred to above. No contrary statement appears anywhere else. In this connection, see Hearings. Committee on Rules. House of Representatives, on HR. 7152, 88th Con~ress. 2d Sess. (19114). pages 94.226. But the Senator's position is that no question of statutory construction arises, because "there is no ambiguity in Section 604." He points out that § 604 begins with the phrase `Nothing contained in this Title shall he construed to authorize action . . with respect to any employment practice . . The heart of Title VI, which is set out in § (101. reads in pertinent part. "No person . . . shall on the ground of race . . . he subjected to discrimination *When the Attorney General was specifically asked for his formal opinion on this question, he provided a thorouch analysis in Mr. Clark's letter of October 4, 1966. to Chairman Smith of the House Rules Committee, in which it is concluded that the Com- missioner of Education is not only authorized but required under Title VI to prescribe faculty desegregation provisions in voluntary desegregation plans. PAGENO="0871" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1693 The pattern of assignnient of teachers to school can seriously subject students to discrimination on the ground of race, such as in a case where teachers with Class `A'' teaching certificates were assigned oniy to white or l)re(lOIIiiJiaIitly white schools. The discrimination affecting Negro students iii all-Negro schools that would result from such a policy would oj~viously be contrary to § 601. Eveii if the provision later added by § 004 w-ere considered to be not internally ambiguous, in spite of its broad but uli(lefine(l I erni "eIi1~)1oyII1e1it practice.'' this provision is certainly in conflict with § 601. To read the two lirovisions harmoniously, the pertinent legislative history must be consulted. Accordingly, § 604 can only be understood by reference to the Attorney Gen- eral's letter and other relevant portions of the legislative history of § 604 dis- cussed above. And § 601 must be read in the light of the statements made prior to the addition of § 604, and at the time it was introduced, showing that § 001 had been expressly understood to extend to the racial allocation of faculty in the public schools affecting educational opportunities of students. and that the later amendments were not considered to make changes of substance in Title VI. See the discussion on page 6 al)ove. In cases such as this, the well-settled principles of statutory construction apply. Where there is ambiguity in a statute, especially in highly remedial legislation such as the Civil Rights Act, a limiting proviso like § 604 must be read in such a way as to avoid defeating the primary purpose of the Act. Miller v. Robertson, 266 U.S. 243, 248 (1924) ; cf. Phillips Petroleum Co. v. WisConsin, 347 U.S. 672 (1954) ; Interstate Gas Co. v. Power Commission, 331 U.S. 682, 601 (1947) Lnited States v. Scharton, 285 U.S. 518 (1932). The only court that has so far specifically considered the applicability of § 604 is the Fifth Circuit in the Jefferson Count!, case (now being reheard). The con- elusion reached in the December 29, 1966 opinion was the same as in this memo- randum. No court has reached the Senator's conclusion. Miimcii 2, 1967. Hon. RUSSELL B. LONG, Chairman, Finance Committee, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR LONG: During the course of Secretary Gardner's testimony be- fore your Committee on February 23. 1967, you raised the question whether the Supreme Court's decision in the Brown ease requires the desegregation of a public school faculty in which teachers have previously been assigned on a racial basis as part of a dual racial public school system. You asked that this Department furnish the Committee a memorandum discussing the case law in this area. The case law. I believe, clearly imposes on public school authorities the affirmative, constitutional duty to desegregate their faculties so that the rights of pupils to the "equal protection of the laws" under the Fourteenth Amendment will no longer be denied. In 1054 the Supreme Court of the United States deem red that the segrega- tion of public school students according to race violates the Fourteenth Amend- ment. Brown v. Board of Education. 347 U.S. 483 1954 . A year later, the Court, in determining how judicial relief could best he fashioned. nientioned the problem of reallocating staff as one of the reasons for permitting the de- segregation process to proceed with "all deliberate speed." Brown v. Board of Education, 349 U.S. 294, 301 (1955). Two cases decided by the Supreme Court in late 1065 indicate that school boards may no longer postpone the responsibility owed their students of desegregating faculty. In Bradley v. School Board of Richmond, iir~iina. 382 l'.~. 103 (1905), the Court took the view- that faculty segregation had a direct impact on a desegregation plan, and that it was improper for the trial court to approve a desegregation plan without inquiring into the matter of faculty segregation. In reaching this conclusion the Court, in a unanimous opinion. coimiimmented that "there is no merit to the suggestion that the relation betw-een faculty alloca- tion on an alleged racial l)asis and the adequacy of the desegregation plans is entirely speculative." And in ruling that there should be no fui'tlier delay in a hearing on the question of faculty desegregation, the Court further emphasized that "delays in desegregation of school systems are no longer tolerable." 382 U.S. at 105. In Rogers v. Paul, 382 U.S. 198 (1965), the Supreme Court extended the un- delayed right to challenge teacher segregation to students who had not yet PAGENO="0872" 1694 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS themselves been affected by the School Board's gradual desegregation plan. The Court stated 3~s2 U.S. at 200 Two theories would give students not yet in desegregated grades sufficient interest to challenge racial allocation of faculty : 1) that racial allocation of faculty denies them equality of educational opportunity without regard to segregation of pupils: and (2) that it renders inadequate an otherwise constitutional pupil desegregation plan Soon to be applied to their grades. Relying on the Bradley case, the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, the circuit covering the states of Alabama. Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas. ruled in January 1966. in a suit also brought by Negro students, that it was "essential" that the plan of desegregation for Jackson, Mississippi "pro- vide an adequate start toward elimination of race as a basis for the employ- meiit and allocation of teachers, administrators, and other personnel." Single- ton V. Jackson Municipal Separate Sc/tool District. 335 F. 2d 865. 870. And in a case decided in August 1966, the sante Court ruled that the plan of desegrega- tion for Mobile. Alabama "must be modified in order that there be an end to the present policy of hiring and assigning teachers according to race by the time the last of the schools are fully desegregated for the school year 1967-68." Daris v. Board of School Commissioners of Mobile County, 364 F. 2d 896. 904. The Courts of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (Maryland. North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia and West Virginia). the Eighth Circuit (Arkansas. Iowa, Minnesota. Missouri. Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota) and the Tenth Circuit (Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico. Oklahoma, Utah aiid Wyoming) have similarly held. In a suit brought by pupils in Durham, North Carolina, the Court stated: We read the [Bradley] decision as authority for the proposition that re- moval of race considerations from faculty selection and allocation is, as a matter of law, aim inseparable and indispensable command within the aboli- tion of pupil segregation in public schools as pronounced in Brown v. Board of Education, supra. 3-17 U.S. 4~3. Hence no proof of the relationship be- tween faculty all cation arid pupil assignment w-as required here. The only factual issue is whether race wa~ a factor entering into the employment and placement of teachers. Wheeler v. Durham Cit u Board of Education. 363 F. 2d 738. 740 (C.A. 4, 1906). The Court in Wheeler uvent on to require (at p. 741) Vacant teacher positions in the future . . . should be opened to all ap- plicants. and each filled by the best qualified applicant regardless of race. Moreover, the order should encourage transfers at the next session by l)reSent members of the faculty to schools in which i)UPi15 are wholly or predomi- nantly of a race ether than such teacher's. A number of the faculty mem- hem's have expressed a willingness to do so. Combined with the employment of new teachers regardless of race. this procedure will, within a reasonable time, effect the desegregation of the faculty. (`ii (1W hers v. Henderson cillc Board of Education, 304 F. 2d 189 (C.A. 4. 1966). involved the pi'oblemn of Negro teachers who lost their jobs when an all Negro school was abolished. The School Board treated them as new applicants. The Court held that this was discriminatory and invalid under the Fourteenth Amendment, stating (at p. 192) First, the mandate of Brown. v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954), forbids the consideration of race in faculty selection just as it forbids it in pupil placement. See IF/i ecler V. 1) urit (tflt City Board of Education, 346 F. 2(1 7(]S. 773 4 Cir. 1905) . Thus the reduction in the iiumber of Negro pupils did not justify a corresponding reduction in the number of Negro teachers. Prank/in. V. (otiuilu l~oard of CUes Coutitti. 360 F. 2d 325 (4 Cir. 1900). Sec nd. the Negro school teachers were public employees who could not be discriminated against on account of their race with respect to their retention in the system. Johnson v. Branch. 304 F. 2(1 177 (4 Cir. 1966), and cases therein cited. Tii a suit brought 1w pi:idls in El Dorado. Ai'lcmins:ts. the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals recognized "the validity of the plaintiffs' complaint regarding the [School] Beard's failure to integrate the teaching staff. Such discrimination is proscribed by Brown and also the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the regulations promulgated thereunder." Kent p v. Bea.sley, 352 F. 2d 14. 22 (1965). The Court elaborated on this theme in Smith v. Board of Education of ][orrilton, 365, F. 2d 770, TTS (1900) PAGENO="0873" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1695 It is our firm conclusion that the reach of the Brown deiisioiis, although they spe('ifically concerned only pul)il discrimination, clearly extends to the proscril)tion of the employment and assignment of public S(llOOl teachers on a racial basis. Cf. (nrtcd Public TVorker~ v. Mitchell, :~~o us. ~s, ioo (1947) ; lI'ieinan v. Updegraff, 344 U.S. 183, 191-192 (19521. See Colorado Anti Discrimjaatjon~ Comm'n v. Continental Air Lines, Inc., 372 U.S. 714. 721 1 1963) . This is particularly evident froni the Supreme Court's positive in- dications that nondiscriminatory allocation of faculty is indispensable to the validity of a desegregation plan. Bradley v. school Board of the Cit,j of Richmond, supra; Rogers v. Paul, supra. This court has already said, `Such discrinmination [failure to integrate the teaching staff] is proscribed by Brown and also the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the regulations promul- gated thereunder.' Kemp v. Beasley, supra, p. 22 of 352 F. 2d. In a recent decision of the Eighth Circuit, Clark v. Board of Education of Little Rock School District, No. 18, 368 (December 15, 1966), the Court required of the Little Rock, Arkansas School Board (slip op., p. 15) a "positive program aimed at ending in the near future the segregation of the teaching and operating staff." The Court stated (slip op., p. 13) We agree that faculty segregation encourages pupil segregation and is detrimental to achieving a constitutionally required non-racially operated school system. It is clear that the Board may not continue to operate a segregated teaching staff. Bradley v. School Board of City of Richnvond, 382 U.S. 103 (1965). . . . It is also clear that the time for delay is past. The desegregation of the teaching staff should have begun many years ago. At this point the Board is going to have to take accelerated and positive action to end discriminatory practices in staff assignment arid recruitment. The Court then proceeded to outline the essential ingredients which such "action" must include (pp. 13-14) First, . . . future employment, assignment, transfer, and discharge of teachers must be free from racial consideration. Two, should the desegre- gation process cause the closing of schools employing individuals predomi- nately of one race, the displaced personnel should, at the very minimum. be absorbed into vacancies appearing in the system. Smith v. Board of Education of Morrilton School District, No. 32, supra. Third. whenever possible, requests of individual staff members to transfer into minority situations should be honored by the Board. Finally, u-c believe the Board make all additional positive commitments necessary to bring about some measure of racial balance in the staffs of the individual schools in the very near future. The age old distinction of "white schools" and "Negro schools" must be erased. The continuation of such distinctions only perpetrates inequality of educational opportunity and places in jeopardy the effective future operation of the entire "freedom of choice" type plan. In a suit brought by pupils in Oklahoma City. Oklahoma. the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit recently affirmed a lower court order requiring that by 1070 "there should he the same percentage of non-w-hite teachers in each school as there now is in the system." Board of Education of Oklahoma City, Piihhic Schools. Independent District No. 89 v. Dowell, No. 8523 (January 23. l9i~7), slip op.. p. 22. affirming. 244 F. Snpp. 971. 977-978 (W.D. ()kla. 1965). The District Court had stated (p. 978) that such a requirement provided "for stability in school faculties during the integration process keying the change to personnel turnover figures indicating that approximately 15% of the total faculty is replaced each year." Although the evidence show-ed that there u-as no difference in the quality of performance between the white and non-white personnel in the school system, the Court of Appeals held (p. 221 that u-here "integration of personnel exists only in schools having both white and non-w-h~te pupils, with no non-white personnel employed in the central administration section of the system", there is "racial discrimination in the assignment of teachers and other personnel." Relying on the Supreme Court's decisions in Rradlcm~ and Roqers, the Court stated (p. 22) that "Itihe 110w-er court] order to desegregate faculty is certainly a necessary initial step in the effort to cure the evil of racial segregation in the school system." Numerous district courts, in applying the law as elucidated by the Supreme Court and the courts of appeal of their various circuits, have entered orders in sohool desegregation cases requiring the deserregation of faculty and staff. In entering such orders, a few of the district courts have also set forth their reasons in memorandum opinions. flue such opinion was issued by the United PAGENO="0874" 1696 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia in refusing to approve a plan submitted by the School Board of Greensville County, Virginia, on the ground that the plan must, but failed, to include a provision for the employment and assignment of staff on a nonracial basis. Wright v. County Board of Grec~sri11c Cou,~ty. Virginia, 252 F. Supp. 378 (E.D. Va. 1966). In holding that a faculty desegregation provision approved by the Commissioner of Education was not sufficient, the court stated (at 384) The primary responsibility for the selection of means to achieve employ- ment and assignment of staff on a nonracial basis rests with the school hoard. . . . Several principles must be observed by the board. Token as- signments will not suffice. The elimination of a racial basis for the employ- ment and assignment of staff must be achieved at the earliest practicable date. The plan must contain well defined procedures which will be put into effect on definite dates. The board will he allowed ninety days to sub- mit amendments to its plan dealing with staff employment and assignment practices. The United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, in providing for similar relief in the case of Brown v. County kS'ch 001 Board of Fredcrick County. 245 F. Supp. 549. 560 (1965), said: [T]he presence of all Negro teachers in a school attended solely by Negro pupils in the past denotes that school a `colored school" just as certainly as if the words were printed across its entrance in six-inch letters. See also Kiei- v. County School Board of Augusta County, 249 F. Supp. 239, 247 (W.D. Va. 1966). The cases which I have reviewed establish, in my judgment, the constitutional duty of school authorities to disestablish imposed racial segregation of facul- ties and recognize that this obligation emanates from the principles enunciated in the Brown decision. Sincerely, RAMSEY CLARK, Deputy Attorney General. [From the Atlanta Constitution, Mar. 10, 1967] SCHOOLS GET A YEAR'S GRACE (By Eugene Patterson) While remaining firm, the U.S. Office of Education is embarking on a more conciliatory approach to encourage desegregation of lagging Georgia schools. For one thing. letters to state departments of education are in the works, inviting the states to assume more responsibilities in effecting the guidelines. Federal funds will be offered to finance increased state activity. Of more immediate significance, however, will be a notification that one Georgia county is about to get from Washington. This decision, which has already been made, will signal a major adjustment in fund cutoff policy by the Office of Educa- tion. The Georgia county in question still has segregated schools. New federal funds have been withheld from it during the current school year, pending a permanent fund cutoff hearing scheduled to be held shortly. Many Georgia counties are in this shape, so they will be interested to know what is about to happen. In return for a firm commitment volunteered by the county school system that it will undertake significant desegregation beginning next September, the Office of Education is postponing the fund cutoff hearing until next September, and is additionally releasing to the schools all of the federal funds that have been with- held from them this year. In short, a school system that has been cited as not obeying the law up to now, but which decides to comply during the next school year, may retrieve the cur- rent year's funds it has lost and delay its fund cutoff hearing by simply spelling out its intentions for the future. The intentions will have to be spelled out; the Office of Education is not ac- cepting vague promises. The county whose funds are about to be restored laid down a detailed plan for student and faculty desegregation, affecting some 10 per cent of its Negro students. But the significance of the new federal decision lies in its show of conciliation. Counties that have done nothing to comply with the guidelines heretofore are not to be consigned ruthlessly to the outer darkness; if they want to come back into PAGENO="0875" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1697 the light they'll be welcomed and helped to catch up with the other school sys- tems, with their past lag written off. The emphasis has thus been turned more decisively to encouraging compliance rather than terminating funds. Those reluctant schools that choose to do that which they have not yet done are offered financial forgiveness for their past omissions. Justice department lawsuits impend for the outright defiant, of course, so that ultimately they will be desegregated by court order if not by the Office of Educa- tion's new encouragement. But the new policy of conciliation in place of punishment offers a way out of the woods for those Georgia school systems wishing to take it. (Reference to following material appears on page 3'~5, Part I:) PIrr5BURGH PuBLIC SCHOOLS. Pittsburgh, Pa.. ~4vrii iS, 1967. MR. JACK REED. Education and Labor Committee Council, Rayburn Building. Washington, D.C. DEAR Mn. REED: I believe that you inquired of this office as to the effect of federal programs under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act Title I which are being extended to nonpublic schools. I think you referred to "31" programs, citing testimony before a Congressional Committee as to the origin of this quotation. I (10 not believe that I stated that 31 programs were extended to the nonpublic schools, but rather than we have about 31 ESEA programs in Pittsburgh, a number of which are extended to the nonpublic schools. Enclosed is a tabulation and description of these programs with those asterisked being the ones which we extend to Parochial Schools. Sincerely, S. P. MABLAND, JR. ESEA TITLE I Communication skills 1 2 $438. 140 Pattern drills 12. 298 Instructional leadership 171, 579 Team teaching 591. 9~i4 Team teaching educable and retarded 10. 084 Transition rooms ~09 100 Time for team leaders 154, 000 Safety education 2 12, 030 Reduction class size-Kindergarten 06. 421 Music instruction 12 186. 610 Secondary counselors -104. 300 Elementary counselors 12 129. 460 Home-school visitors 12 104.179 Employment supervisors 2 97, 180 Adapted physical education 151, 350 Psychologists ~i oso Eyeglasses 2 10. 000 Speech and hearing mobile units 90. 450 Administration 2 1S9 son Evaluation 2 20s. son Lunchroom aids (3) 3. 577 Library Aids 12 77 118 Teachers-Pnwed mothers1 2 30, 800 Demountables 208. 000 Educational camping1 23 25. 000 Assistant teacher. preprimary (2 months') 42. 768 Family related education (2 months)2 5. MO Saturday workshops 5.984 Nongraded planning2 7. 950 Television 49, 950 Total 3.436. 541 Projects earned out on non-public-school premises. Denotea non -public-school involvement. ~ Beyond regular schoolda~v hours. NoTE-No non-public-school personnel. PAGENO="0876" 169S ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDtCATION AMENDMENTS PROGRAMS Tj~cDER TITLE 1. ESEA. WHICH ARE SHARED WITH NoN-PuBLIC SCHOOLS COMMTJNICATION SKILLS The Communication Skills Program provides remedial reading, writing, and speaking as well as a program of enrichment. The teachers, employed by the Pittsburgh Public Schools under Title 1 ESEA, go into the parochial schools to teach effective communication. Approximately sixty teachers are involved in this assault on language problems and other stumbling blocks in the realm of communication. SAFETY EDUCATION This program will provide for an expansion of the safety education staff by two and also provide for the initial purchase of important safety equipment which can be used as effective teaching devices. Among the specific duties of the expanded staff in certified Title 1 ESEA schools will be: (1) to make distance checks; (2) to conduct traffic safety survey of all schools-need for cross walks, lady guards; etc.; (3) to inspect bus routes; (4) to supervise school safety patrol operations: (5) to be responsible for accident reports; (6i to help teachers in charge of driver club programs in high schools; (7) to conduct fire drills in the schools and pre-school centers; (8) work with City Bureau of Fire Prevention on Junior Fire Patrol Programs. MUSIC INSTRUCTION This is a plan to provide free instrumental music instruction for talented ele- mentary school pupils in public and non-public schools. This music project will provide instrumental music instruction for students from grades 1 to 8 in identi- fied areas of the city. The children in these underprivileged areas will have the opportunity for cultural growth through the study of a musical instrument. ELEMENTARY COUNSELORS This program sets forth t~n elementary counselors who will work with guid- ance and counseling services in the elementary public and non-public schools. This will be a concentrated effort because typically the disadvantaged child needs to be helped with his total development: educationally, socially, and emo- tionally. SECONDARY COUNSELORS This program sets forth eight secondary counselors who will work with guid- ance and counseling services in the secondary public and non-public schools. This will be a concentrated effort because typically the disadvantaged child needs to be helped with his total development: educationally, socially, and emotionally. HOME AND SCHOOL VISITORS Because of the acute shortage of professionally trained home and school visitors, this project selects ten outstanding individuals and trains them part- time for certification, and utilizes theni the majority of their time as "Home and School Visitors" to work with disadvantaged youngsters in the public and non- public schools. EMPLOYMENT SUPERVISORS Pittsburgh. for three years, has demonstrated the worth of providing job placement services particularly for graduates and drop-outs who, on their own, are not successful in finding suitable employment. Present economic conditions offer an opportune time for establishing positive relationships with employers in the Pittsburgh community. Two additional placement officers are assigned to areas of sncbil an(I cultural deprivation to arrange employment for graduates and drop-outs. PSYChOLOGISTS ~ The implementation of this program will enable the psychological staff to more nearly meet the demands for increased service in Title 1 ESEA Programs, par. ticularly in elementary schools. and to make possible some services for parochial school pupils. PAGENO="0877" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1699 EYEGLASSES Eyeglasses will be provided for needy children who do not receive them from Public Welfare but who fit Title 1 ESEA criteria. SPEECH, HEARING, AND VISUAL IMPROVEMENT The Mobile Speech and Hearing Center will be designed to meet the special educational needs of pupils with speech or hearing handicaps from pre-kinder- garten through high school. This service is made available to both Public and non-public schools. ADMINISTRATION The service of the administrative staff under Title 1 ESEA is available to non- public schools and their staff for information, consultation, and implementation of appropriate educational programs. LIBRARY AIDES This program will provide library aides on time basis of one-half time in a public school and one-half time in a parochial school in certified Title 1 ESEA areas Of the city. The aides are trained to do sub-professional library work in oider to free the librarian for better service to the children. TEACHERS-UNWED MO'rHERS The basic purpose of this program is to enable pregnant school age girls to complete their high school education and graduate. This service is available to public and non-public school students. EDUCATIONAL CAMPING Educational camping is a three day outdoor educational experience for sixth- grade pupils in Title 1 ESEA public and non-public schools. This program pro- vides an outdoor laboratory for the "incubation" of pupil skills. ASSISTANT TEACHERS-PRE-PRIM~ARY Assistant teachers are hired to lend supportive service to teachers in the pre- primary program. This service is made available to both public and non-public school youngsters in Title 1 ESEA areas of the city. FAMILY RELATED EDUCATION Family Related Education provides classes for adults whose interest cannot he met by the standard evening school program. In order to help culturally deprived children to develop their potential, Family Related Education seeks to provide more educational and cultural opportunities for the parents and athilts in the communities where these children live. This service is made available to parents of public and non-public school pupils in Title 1 ESEA areas of the city. TELEVISION Television programs will provide structural linguistics instruction to junior and senior high school pupils in public and non-public schools in Title 1 ESEA areas. The regular classroom work is supplemented by two daily television pro- grams, "News 6~ and Structural Linguistics." The program is made available to non-public school pupils through the use of television sets on loan for this specitmc purpose. ________ THE SCHOOL DIs'FIUCT OF PHIlADELPHIA. BOARD OF EDUCATION. April 10. 19d7. I-Ion. CARL D. PERKINS, (1ma irman, House Education and Labor Committee, House of Representafivrs. Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. PrRKINS: We deeply appreciate the opportunity afforded our Super- intendent, Dr. C. Taylor Whittier, of appearing before the Committee a few weeks ago. The enclosure, "Federal Funding Needs, School District of Philadel- PAGENO="0878" 1700 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS phia, Pennsylvania" is a follow-up to that appearance to further acquaint you with Philadelphia's needs, plans and hopes. Big cities find that local revenue sources can no longer meet the increasing costs of public education. With respect to programs using Title I money, Philadelphia will need $14.000.000 in additional funds just to stand still. Another $10,000,000 wifl also be needed to implement new and expanded programs in the basic skills areas. At the present time. 40% or 108,000 children in Philadelphia's Public schools are classified as educationally disadvantaged. A variety of specialists, materials, supportive services and programmatic approaches to develop new educational, remedial, guidance and psychological service programs are needed to overcom& this deprivation. Funds granted on a per pupil basis rather than categorical funds would permit the school district to implement unique and innovative ap- proaches. $250 per child is the basic allotment that is needed. Approximate cost-$27,000,000. Experimentation and innovation are the keys to educational change. In order to implement desirable change, facility renovation and design are necessary components to the development of new and innovative educational programs. Funds for alterations and improvements and new building construction keyed to innovation and experimentation should receive incentive grants of 25% from the Federal government. These funds will add impetus and will help to develop the types of programs that can be unique and dynamic forces in changing the focus of education. The teaching of educationally disadvantaged children requires new approaches and special techniques. Teachers of these children must be constantly involved in staff development programs so that they can more adequately fulfill their role in the classroom. In order to do this, massive staff development programs must be implemented. These programs will greatly enhance the instruction these children are receiving and will also provide teachers with needed and necessary teaching skills. The proposed increases in the 1967-08 budget for the implementation of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act would make it possible for the schools of Philadelphia to build upon the gains made from this source of funds. We strongly urge that the Committee, under your astute leadership, give full support to the increases so as to sustain and increase the forward movement already in motion to provide all children with equality of educational opportunity. Sincerely yours, ROBERT L. P0INDEmE, Deputy Superintendent. Federal funding needs, School District of Philadelphia, Pa. Vocational Education Act $4, 000, ooo Smith-Hughes and George-Barden Acts 1, 012, 500 Economic Opportunity Act: Title I-B 3,000 000 Title IT-A 24, 650, 000 Title 11-B 960, 000 Manpower Development Training Act 2, 000, 000 National Defense Education Act: Title III 2, 000, ~) Title V 467, 000 Civil Rights Act 500, 000 Educating the atypical child 5, 000, 000 National Teachers Corps 3, 370, 000~ Education Professions Act 520, 000 Elementary and Secondary Education Act: Title I 25, 000, 000 Title II 3, 000 000 Title III 4, 000 000 Total 79, 479, 500~ VOCATIONAL EDUCATION ACT At present. allocations are made on a first-come, first-served basis, according to the State plan. PAGENO="0879" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1701 A minimum of $3 million is needed for next year. Local effort must be $11/2 million. As demands on the Operating Budget of the Philadelphia School District increase, the capability for providing matching funds diminishes. Recomnvendations 1. Establish allotments on the basis of population and need. 2. Reduce the local contribution factor from 50% to 10%. 3. Include children in special education as eligible recipients and waive the requirement that they must be in grades t) to 12. 4. The $3,000,000 needed for next year should be divided as follows: $2, 000, 000-Trade and Industry Equipment 750, 000-Distributive an ci Commercial Education 250, 000-Home Economics 5. An additional $1,000.000 is needed for staff development and for the development of new program manuals. SMITH-HUGHES AND GEORGE-BARDEN ACTS The formula should be increased to $75 per child. Reimbursement should be allotted for children who are presently in Comprehensive High Schools. Stu- dents in the Commercial Course should also be included. Approximate cost- $1.012,500. ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT Title I B-Neighbor/mood Youth Corps At present 1600 youths are enrolled in the full-year Work Training Program and 2,500 in the summer program. This program has cut the drop-out rate but does not provide adequately for the great number of potential drop-outs. It is proposed that the program be expanded to enroll 3,000 in-school youth during the school year and summer. Approximate cost-$3,000,000. Title II A-Community action programs 1. Operation Outreach.-provides remedial reading, tutorial homework help, counseling, and cultural enrichment. It should l)e doubled in size instead of being phased out. An estimated 20.000 children need this service during after- school and evening hours. Approximate cost-$1,750,000. 2. Full Year Head Start Program-Currently provides prekindergarten educa- tion for 5,500 children between the ages of 3 and 5. There is a need in Phila- delphia for a program for at least twice this number-11.000 children. Approxi- mate cost-$12,500.000. 3. 2v~mmer Head Start Pro gram-To maintain the present level of this six- week kindergarten program for 1,500 children would cost $400,000. 4. Head Start Follow-up-New and innovative approaches to the individualiza- tion of instruction must be developed to provide the vehicle for moving dig- advantaged children more rapidly into the regular instructional program. Head Start Follow-up will help to maintain the gains achieved in the pre-school pro- gram. Cost-$10,000,000. Title II B-(Title III ESEA) Adult basic literacy 700 adults each year during the past two years have acquired fundamental reading and writing skills. This program should be expanded to serve 1100 adults. Cost-$960,000. MANPOWER DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING ACT To maintain the present level and to expand the program to meet increasing needs for training and retraining workers w-ould cost $2,000,000. NATIONAL DEFENSE EDUCATION ACT Title III Grants under this Title are made on a matching basis. Although additional funds are needed to buy equipment, books and materials in eligible areas, the burden imposed by the 50% contribution makes it difficult for the School District to benefit because of its tight budget. Congress should re(lUCe the contribution to 10% and thus increase the ability of the Sehool District to benefit. To con- PAGENO="0880" 1702 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATTON AMENDMENTS tillue tu iluleove Ccienee Laboratories. Instructional Materials Celiters and pro- v~de fuil(b~ fr eligible materials, the School District needs 52,000,04)0. Title V To provide a ratio of one counselor to 400 students in our secondary and spe- cial schools, the allotments should be increased to $3.S8 per child. Cost- .~-1dT.00u. CIVIL RIGHTS ACT Title IV Better insights a ic provided when teachers and administrators participate ii) ill-service training in inter-group education. Funds under this Title will also be used to foster integration in the schools. Cost-$500,000. EDUCATING THE ATYPICAL CHILD The physically, emotionally and mentally handicapped child requires skills, curriculum and methods of instruction that are unique. Individual attention to the needs of each child is of paramount importance. To do the job so that handi- capped children can become productive members of society will require $5,000,000 next year. NATIONAL TEACHER CORPS A change of focus is needed in the prescribed use of corpsmen. Corpsmen would be of greater service if they were permitted to carry a regular teaching load, with intensive supervision, and with adjustments in their schedules to per- mit time for college course work. At present they can be used only as supple- mental personnel. Philadelphia could use 300 interns and 60 team leaders. Approximate cost-$3,370,000. EDUCATION PROFESSIONS ACT Funds for upgrading the instructional and administrative skills of 2,000 staff members next year would cost $400,000. Teacher aides have demonstrated their dedication and interest in the disad- vantaged children in the inner city schools. Many aides could become competent teachers if funds could be provided for tuition grants. Grants for 200 aides would cost $120,000. ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT Funds provided in this act impose a real hardship on local school systems be- cause of the restrictive nature of the guidelines. We agree with the general principle that guidelines must be established. However, we feel that these should be broadly stated so that local professional judgment can be the basis for ex- penditures. Innovation and creativity are stifled because the guidelines are so structured in nature. Programmatic change when needed is impeded because of the necessity of prior approval from the granting agency. It is therefore our view that guidelines broadly stated, giving local educational agencies freedom to use funds as needed but with auditing procedures established so that abuses will be avoided, would be the soundest approach to the expenditure of these funds. The second limitation of the legislation is the pattern of funding. Appropria- tion should he made early enough and guaranteed over a period of years. so that sound educational planning and implementation of projects can be undertaken. A fundamental change should be the funding of projects on a program year basis rather than on a fiscal year basis. With these changes in effect, and with the establishment of guidelines that will stay in effect for the life of the legislation, school districts would be able to develop programs that will more nearly meet the needs of disadvantaged children. Title I The Iowa Test scores in Reading and Arithmetic for Philadelphia highlighted the need for a massive program to upgrade basic skills. Planning committees are now at work designing new programs to help overcome these deficiencies. In order to fully implement these and other essential programs. $25,000.000 will be required next year. Early notification of funding is imperative so that pro- grains can be carefully planned, organized and evaluated. PAGENO="0881" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATJON AMENDMENTS 1703 Title II The Department of Public Instruction, Harrisburg, Penna.. has mandated that every school have a library with a minimum of ten titles per child by 1973. An allotment of $25 per child would help to meet this objective. Approximate cost-$3,000,000, Title III Philadelphia has developed "new linkages with the community as a result of funds provided by this Title. Community and Magnet Schools are in their infancy. Intensive Learning Centers are in the planning stage. Career Develop- ment programs are being studied, and the use of large numbers of volunteers and paraprofessionals is about to become a reality. These and many other innovations will require a grant of $4,000,000. GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS Big cities find that local revenue sources can no longer meet the increasing costs of public education. Philadelphia, this year. will need $14.000,000 ~n addi- tional funds just to stand still. Another $10000000 will also be needed to imple- ment new and expanded programs in the basic skill areas. At the present time 40% or 108,000 children in Philadelphia's Public Schools are classified as educationally disadvantaged. A variety of specialists, mate- rials, supportive services and programmatic approaches to (levelol) new educa- tional, remedial, guidance and psychological service Programs are needed to overcome this deprivation. Funds granted on a per pupil basis rather than categorical funds would permit the school district to implement unique and innovative approaches. $250 per child is the basic allotment that is needed. Approximate cost-$27,000,000. SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION Experimentation and innovation are the keys to educational change. In order to implement desirable change, facility renovation and design are necessary components to the development of new and innovative educational programs, Funds for alterations and improvements and new building construction keyed to innovation and experimentation should receive incentive grants of 25% from the Federal government. These funds will add impetus and will help to develop the types of programs that can be unique and dynamic forces in chang- ing the focus of education. (Reference to following material appears on p. 349.) STATEMENT OF THOMAS W. CARE, STAFF D~ECTOR, NATIONAL ADVISORY COUNCIL ON THE EDUCATION OF DISADVANTAGED CHILDREN The mission of the National Advisory Council on the Education of Disad- vantaged Children is to evaluate the administration and effectiveness of federal education programs for disadvantaged children. Simply stated, the Council attempts to assess what the $1 billion being spent under Title I is buying in terms of improved education for poor children. The Operation of this Council is unusual in several respects: (1) It is presidentially appointed and is independent of the Office of Education. The Council's reports are made directly to the President and Congress and are not reviewed by a governnhent agency. (2) No member of the Council is a government official. (3) The Council has its own small staff and hires consultants who ob- serve federal programs. Consequently, it is not dependent on any outside source for the data that form the basis of the Council reports. (4) Because of the Council's independence, local school officials are as- sured that information the Council gathers will not affect their federal grants. The Council's principal efforts in the past year have involved on-site observa- tions of a sample of Title I and National Teachers Corps projets Although our sample includes only 3% of the counties eligible for Title I funds, these 101 counties account for almost one-third of the .~1.07 hillion appropriated for Title I. 75-492 -CT -- 50 PAGENO="0882" 1704 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS The Council's approach has been to send highly qualified observers to sit in classrooms and talk with children, teachers, and administrators. An interesting side effect of these visits is that most consultants have been warmly received by local educators who have plied them with questions about the promising educa- tional programs they have observed in other parts of the state or nation. The reports, which provide a substantial data base. are theii analyzed by the Council and its staff. Members of the Council here today will report on the Council's findings. STATEMENT BY L)R. RICHARD L. DARLING. DIRECTOR. DEPARTMENT OF INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS. MONTGOMERY COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, MARYLAND, AN!) PRESIDENT, AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL LIBRARIANS My name is Richard L. Darling. I am President of the American Association of School Librarians, a division of the American Library Association (a non- profit. professional organization), and a department of the National Education Association. My present position is Director of Instructional Materials. Mont- gomery County Public Schools, Rockville, Maryland, and among my responsibili- ties is the implementation of Title II programs under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. I am grateful for the opportunity to submit this statement for the record of hearings of this Committee on the Elementary and Secondary Education Amend- ments of 1967. As a representative of the American Library Association and the American Association of School Librarians, I wish to support the bill as a whole which amends and extends the existing legislation. In connection with this amending legislation, however, there are several seri- ous shortcomings to which we would like to call your attention. One is that, despite the authorization of 8150 million in Title II of the Act for fiscal year 1OGS. the budget recommendation for fiscal year 1968 is only $105 million. As you know, Title II has to do with school library resources, textbooks, and other instructional materials. Since even the authorization of $150 million was thought by those working in the field as woefully inadequate for overcoming the critical gaps existing in this educational area throughout the Nation, it is easy to see the great concern of those persons engaged in this field and aware of this dis- tressing situation. We hope that your Committee will correct this difficulty. We are pleased, however, that the bill provides continuation of the benefits of the Act to Indian children enrolled in Bureau of Indian Affairs schools and children in overseas dependents schools operated by the Department of Defense. Another matter of apprehension to us is that amendments do not provide for the extension this current year of Title I. Title II. and Title III of the Ele- mentary and Secondary Education Act. It is true that these titles do not ex- pire until June 30. l9uiS. but if the question of their extension is left until next year. the planners of these programs u-ill be faced with uncertainties and (lelays. In the case of Title II. for example. should the extension not take place until sometime in 10G~. it eciuld well to-' late in tile seliool year which begins in Sep- tember 1068 before the library books and instructional materials would be avail- able to 110' students mu tea(l1er~ who so desperately need them, and should hove theni without any lapse in time i ii~e. Time ESEA has already accomplished much for the students and teachers of the Fnited States. Since other witnesses have dealt in detail with other titles of the Act, my remarks will be mlirectec1 malaly toward the effectiveness of Title Il-School Library Resources, Textbooks and other Instructional Materials. In order to get that information, the American Association of School Librarians set up an Ad Hoc Committee for the Implementation of Federal Prorrams to undertake a national survey. This statement which I am presenting is heavily dependent on the letters and reports from State awl local school library super- visors wtlbll were sent to tln~z A(1 Hoc Comumittee. As would be expected with a new program, many school systems experienced minor (lmffldulties at the outset. Most prolilenis related to delays at the Federal and State levels in preparing and approving State plans and regulations. Others resulted from school library staffs being too small to continue effectively former levels of service to students and teachers w'hile completing careful selection of materials to be purchased with Title II funds. To administer this important ex- panded program efficiently and promptly requires a strong administrative staff, PAGENO="0883" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1705 which does not exist in many school districts which do not have even one trained school librarian. Lack of sufficient administrative staff is also a serious handi- cap in many large city school systems. Attention should be given to the needs of localities as well as the States. In other school districts the library facilities were inadequate. However, the great bulk (it the reports indicate that the prob- lems were minor compared to the great benefits received under the Act. The State and local supervisors report that implementation of Title II, overall, presented no major problems except in the large metropolitan areas. Selection and purchasing were usually delegated by the States to local public school sys- tems. Delivery on orders were usually reasonably rapid. The schools used a wide variety of recognized selection aids in choosing materials. (The American Association of School Librarians prepared and published a pamphlet, Selecting Materials for Sch.ool Libraries; Guidelines for Quality Collections, in an edition of 175,000 copies for free distribution through the State departments of educa- tion, which was used in many schools.) The teachers and librarians selected materials to meet school needs iii supporting tile instrw'th ~ pl'ogm'iiIii, empha- sizing, in many places, materials for slow learners, for advanced students, and for other children with special needs, especially the disadvantaged. Not even personnel shortages seriously hampered schools in implementing Title II Eligible schools were able to employ librarians and library clerks with Title I ESEA funds, using the two titles to support each other. In other school systeiliS local funds supplie(l additional personiiel and facilities, a good example of how a federal aid program can encourage greater local effort. Often the schools coordinated Title II and NDEA Title Ill. purchasing audiovisual mate- rials of instruction with Title II funds, and the necessary audiovisual equip- ment under NJ)EA Title III. Specific examples of improved instructional materials acquired and library programs resulting from Title II furnish more dramatic evidence of the value of this important education legislatiOn. For example, Jefferson County School District, in Colorado, developed an Art and Music Reference Library so that all county teachers would have access to materials which could not be duplicated economically in every school. In Oklahoma. the Putnam City Schools developed new central libraries in all of its eleven schools by consolidating small existing classroom collections and ad(ling new materials with Title II funds. With local money, the district em- ployecl a school library supervisor, and organized the materials so that even those they had before Title II were made more accessible to support the learning needs of boys and girls. The Chanute, Kansas, Board of Education, hired a library coordinator, one and one-half librarians, and eight part-tIme library clerks in order to assure effective use of Title II materials in its eight elementary schools. Chanute organized central processing for its school library resources, and developed a union catalog so that all pupils could benefit from the collections. The Nebraska State Department of Education developed a unique school library demonstration program. Using part of its Title TI adnmimustrative alloca- tion. Nebraska purchased a mobile unit and stocked it with examples of quality print and non-print instructional materials, equipment for using non-print mate- rials, and library supplies and equipment. They have used their mobile model library throurhout the State for in-service education an(l to encourage local effort in developing school library set-vices. These reports are representative of the exciting developments in school library services, and are a few examples of what is occurring throughout the Nation puiler ESEA, but it is still too early for a definitive report on the effects of Title TT. However, it is a highly visible program. and one that shows an im- mediate effect on teaching and learning. In most States, it has had its greatest m"'pact on elementary schools, where the need for school library resources was groatost. with a much smaller portion of the funds unclom' Title TI going to secondary schools. It has provided both hooks and clidiovi-ama] materials in order to support instruction with the n-iciest possible range of learning materials. The second year of implementation of this title will, unciouhtedlv. shon- even more benefit in improved education. On behalf of the American Library Association, and especially of tho 11~4fl members of the American Association of School Librarians. I wish to thank this Committee and the Congress for its farsightedness in enacting such beneficial legislation, and to urge its extension at this time for another five years with increased authorizations to assure a continuing effort to achieve quality edmica- tion for the boys and girls of the United States throurh expanded school library resources. PAGENO="0884" 1706 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS WICHITA PUBLIC SCHOOLS, UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 259, Wichita, Kans., January 27, 1967. Hon. CARL D. PERKINS, Chairman. Education and Labor Committee, U.S. House of Representatives, Lonqworth house Office Building, Washington, D.C. THE HONORABLE MR. PERKINS: I have read that your committee will soon begin hearings on `Follow-Through"-a program to extend the educational momentum of Head Start Projects through the primary grades. In my present position I am directing a $1 million project for disadvantaged youth in the Wichita Public Schools under Title I. P.L. 80-10. I also directed Project Head Start here last summer for 1070 five years old.s. We are planning two new Head Start programs-one a summer project for 800 children and the other a twelve month project for 180 four years olds from the most severely deprived families. In your Conimittee's deliberations, may I recommend that you give Strong consideration to these points: 1. Inasmuch as the large majority of Head Start programs are adminis- tered by local school systems, monies designated for Head Start should be added to Title I, P.L. 89-10 amendments and allocations. This change would streamline accounting, auditing and budgeting procedures. Further- more, it would he possible to develop a more closely integrated program if we had to deal with only one funding agency-U.S. Office of Education. 2. Congress must assume responsibility for funding educational program in advance of the academic year in which these endeavors are to be initiated. Ipgrading society through educational innovations is an awesome task in itself without the millstone of belated appropriations that cripple local implementation. Here are two examples: (a) Title I monies were appropriated for 1967 far too late. With the adjustments required by the 1966 amendments, the U.S. Office of Education had to obtain new foundation figures from each state. Although Congress passed a continuing resolution, firm figures were not obtainable. As of this date, our school system still does not have final word on the 1967 appropriation figure and the first semester is history. Meanwhile. we have a stock of new Title I projects ready to submit when monies become available. Such delays jeopardize new programs and prohibit effective educational planning. Fiscal 196$ appropriations should be made in time for State Depart- ments of Public Instruction to allocate the monies available by June 1 at the latest. (b) Head Start Programs have been approved only days prior to the initiation schedule. Last summer we had eight working days to "tool up" for the project-a task of impossible dimensions. Our regional OEO office has promised approval by February 28. This is a great improvement-if it actually happens. Concerning the "Follow-Through" legislation soon to be debated, these factors must be considered: 1. The schools need space-classrooms-to permit smaller classes during the crucial period of grade 1 through 3. Some program improvements can he implemented with additional monies for additional teachers, aides, etc., hut severe limitations are prevalent in many urban areas due to already over-crowded schools. Construction money is needed. 2. Title I programs, with increased flexibility, can be one of the answers to follow-through projects but only if the limitations discussed above can be overcome. The NEA hacked legislative program provides an avenue toward the solution of the disadvantaged pupil problem. I urge you to become acquainted with it and to push for its enactment. Sincerely. DONALD E. YOUNGLTJND, Assistant Director, Federal Programs. RALPH WALDO EMERSON ScHooL, Newton Upper Falls. Mass.. March 9, 1967. Hon. CARL P~KINs. House Office Buildinfi. Washington. D.C. DEAR MR. PERKINS: I am teaching the primary grades in the Title I program of the Newton Public School. I am also coordinating the team work of three PAGENO="0885" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS 1707 reading specialists, a speech therapist, a psychologist, and a social worker. These women are comj)letely dedicated to the task of helping disadvantaged children adjust to an unequal society, help them to function in it effectively and prepare them for a trade later on, so they will become useful members of this society. Children in fringe areas, where poverty is coexistent with wealth, are much more aware of their deprivation and feel it more acutely than those isolated in Kentucky who have no basis for comparison. Apathy, negativism, with- drawal, criminal tendencies, or belligerence evolve from this awareness. We are using all facilities available in the City of Newton to help these (`hil- dren. We are communicating with other Title I areas such as Gloucester, Rox- bury, and Worcester to compare approaches and gain useful information to improve and expand the program. This is a program well-started. To discontinue Federal aid would just inten- sify the negativistic attitude these people have for a society which would reach Pout to help and then withdraw before constructive attitudes and improved learn- ing processes are reached. I am enclosing the following: (1) An analysis we have made in Newton of our approaches with dis- advantaged children. (2) A copy of my letter to the Boston Herald replying to their articles, "Are the Rich Getting Richer?" I have been in the heart of this program for over a year now. Most children ~nd families are responding to the interest we are extending them and are realizing for the first time that someone "cares" what happens to them. I hope this information is of help to you in evaluating the Title I program. Sincerely yours, Mrs. MARY JANE SCOTT. TITLE I IN NEWTON A Title I team is comprised of: 1 social worker, 1 psychologist, 1 speech therapist, and reading teachers. Purpose: to take children who are not reading at grade level, diagnose their difficulties, and help them to learn to read (and enjoy it). Procedure: Diagnostic (and we are really pin-pointing problems). Causes for non-reading are: 1. Slow learners: Low I.Q., Slow starters. 2. Disadvantaged backgrounds: Too many children in family, Few cultural advantages (enrichment needed to aid comprehen. sion). 3. Emotional Disturbances: Blocking learning, Child uses reading as a weapon of defense, Child can't concentrate because of preoccupation with deep-set worries, Speech impaired functionally blocking communication. 4. Organic handicaps: Speech, organic defects, Neurological, perceptive, motor difficulties. How Title I is helping in these four areas (1) and (2) child immediately taken by remedial reading teachers. Multiple choices of attack used until child responds with interest and success to method best for him. (3) child given psychological help solely if problems are acute or in addition to reading program. (Also therapeutic tutors obtained for a few children to meet their individual special needs). Speech therapy is given solely or in addition to reading dependent upon the intensity of the defect. Comprehension in reading is dependent upon correct enunciation. (4) Organic and neurological defects hard to separate from emotional, yet imperative to diagnose to protect the child from too many pressures to perform at home and in the classroom. Problem: to know what to expect in terms of achievement; to find ways to structure special learning situation for these children. PAGENO="0886" 1708 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDLCATION AMENDMENTS Primary goals of Title I in helping these children 1. Instill a positive attitude that reading is fun. 2. Reshape and improve attitudes towards reading so that it is fun. 3. Improve self image of child. 4. Improve self image of parents. How Title I is achieving its goals with new creative approach to old programs 1. Enrichment: examples-theatre, summer programs, field trips. 2. Instructional: (a) learning machines-language master, filmstrip projectors, con- trolled readers, tape recorders, record players (b) Tailor-making the reading approach to child (organic, linguistic, experience charts. letter-play, diary-writing, games) 3. Classes: small or individual 4. Preventative: Parent gi.oups_-_educating parent on child development and home management and parent-child relationships. EMERSON SchooL, TITLE I To: The Boston Herald. Purpose: To defend the use of Federal funds in Title I in Newton. HERALD STATEMENTS 1. Title I allocates money according to the number of poor children, not on the basis of quality of education they are receiving Answer: Poor children need more than interaction in a clossroom of 25-30 children. They becunie `swallowed-up" in the general pressure to "pass tests," to get on to the next grade. The classroom alone cannot make up for family deprivations. Tl1e surge of rural families to the suburbs focuses awareness upon inequalities, points up poverty versus wealth, and leads to deep-seated antago- nism. Enridhnidnt and basic re-education must be carried on in small groups and. even, individually. 2. Brcatliitt County, has $285.00 per pupil; Newton has $`i60.00 per pupil. Answer: Breathitt County needs to specifically define the problems and needs of the par children, fill out the dozens of forms correctly and completely, and ask for funds. Newton did this uniT received funds. and so could Breathitt County. Also, who is to say that Breathitt County. if given a few more thou- sands of dollars. would "identify. attract, and aid the more seriously disadvan- taged" more than a school system experienced in spending money efficiently and wisely? 3. "Aids" bncfit the entire school Answer: A poor child demonstrates his new knowledge on a Title I Language Master to a wealthy child. Who~s benefitting? 4. Dixappointiiill ,flndin~is .` The ic/au/s are failing to identify and attract the most seriously disadvantaged cli il(lJv'n. Answer : Aj at hetic. negative, belligerent, withdrawn children, some with crimi- nal beginnings are being aided by psychologists, social workers, speech therapists, and readinr teachers in Newton Title I. To help them adjust to an unequal so- ciety. function within it effectively, and to find a trade to help them become use- fimI miiembers in this society is our goal. Group meetings among parents to help theni to help themselves and to hell) their dhhlclren have been slowly attracting the self-conscious. imeedy, bewildered adult. Appalling home conditions are not limited to Kentucky 5. `Title I cii ililrcn iii 1V iiton attend i'e.'nedial reading classes in carpeted rooms iritli rails of hooi:x. A:1s\ver : The keys to the remedial situation are the humanity and intelligence of a genuinely interested adult skilled in the selective and varied use of the right materials to meet the child's immediate problems. iVi ir. iii ii q a it jul s to the Hera 1(1: Where di' you learn how to become competent in diagnosing disadvantaged children and ju(lgiflg successful means of averting tragedy? My answer is to l)emfl in the fringe areas w-here poverty coexists with wealth and the inequalities are lvi us to every ne. hire therapists and teachers who care about educational ineqimimhil ies who will work diligently long and extra hours to help children to cope with a hostile world full of stumbling blocks toward constructive learning. Let these people communicate their ideas to other poverty areas such as Breat- hitt County to hell) them "identify and attract their most seriously disadvan- taged children," apply for funds and to use these funds efficiently. PAGENO="0887" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATIOX AN~ENDMENTS 1709 BENTON HARBOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS, Ben ton Harbor, Micli., March 9, 19G7, Hon. CARL D. PERKINS, House Ojlce Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR Mn. 1'ERKIXS: Many members of the Michigan Association of School Ad- ministrators visited Washington during the week of February 27th to learn more about federal legislation and aid and how' it affects our schools in Michigan. Many personal contacts were made with our Michigan congressillen to under- stand their views on federal programs aild for the school administrators to ex- press their problems, concerns, and iilterest in federal programs. Many of our congressmen suggested w'e visit the hearings your committee was conducting on the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which we were able ti do on Friday. March 3rd. In your continents to the Superi'~teiident of Pitts- burg, you suggested a personal letter be addressed to you explaining the problems of Title I Projects in our district. Therefore, we would like to list the following information ~hut the School District of the City of Benton harbor, Michigan and the operam (11 f federal pro- grains in our district. 1. Our school district °overs approximately 50 squat-c mi les. total esti- mated population of 46.000 people. with 1)U1)liC school ei.titiln~eiits of 12,000 students K-12 and 1200 parochial students. 2. Approximately 3O7~ of our student-s are in a Negro minority group. .`i. We are a new' school di~tri('t if a little over a year with time consolida- tion of 17 small units into one. 4. ()ur eeonniically anti educationally deprived stiideiits are located in 9 tcmi'get schools in the district. 5. Last summer our community had nearly a week of nightly rioting in the streets. 0. Our allocation under Title I fir 19Ii~-66 was 531)4,0110. We had the following projects in operation last year: (a) Employed registered nurses for the school district and support- ing hi al tim i ro tra iii~. (b'i Employed one counselor. (c) Conducted an extensive summer and Saturday Physical Educa- tion and Recreation Program. (d) Employed 20 helping teachers to work in target schools. (e) Developed the Community School Program in two target schools. (f I Started adult high school credit classes and expanded the Adult Basic Education Program. (g) Developed pilot junior high typing program in our junior high school. (h) Conducted an extensive In-Service Program for teachers in our target schools. (i) Equipped a complete dentist office and employed a dentist and dental hygienist to aid our students. (j) I)eveloped a series of reading programs in the target schools. (k~ Developed an Instructional Materials Center for the target schools. (11 Provided musical instruments and a music instruetion program for the students. (ni) Conducted a large educational summer school program. 7. The allocation for our district for 1960-67 is estimated at 5250.000. 8. We have had to cut many programs from last year and these cuts have handicapped the operations of our programs in our target schools. We have many reimbursable programs in our district and feel they are impor- tant to its peru tiwi, Bitt, it is ott r lii ~l' loll ef that oimly one a geu('v should (liter~ ate the nrogr-i mit. For exaim b, tie 11 i'a d st-i vt pr qoct I i-liar adn~ inistered by the school district and the Community Action Agency. `We truly believe that Title I funds are providinr educational opportunities and dvan ta ges in our di strict a ad sit ould tat lie i-nt ha k btt t expanded fir a district, like ours, who needs to meet the problems (if slums. tie facto segrega- tion, illiteracy and poverty head on. We have provided you with a short sketch of our Title I progia ins and prob- lems and will supply more detail at your request. Thank you for your intem'est in the School District of the City of Benton Harbor, Michigan. Very truly yours, ALBERT C. J0HN5EN. Si perintendeut. PAGENO="0888" 1710 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS FLEMINGSRURG, Ky., March 8, 1967. Subject : Benefits from ESEA Title I and Title II. Hon. CARL D. PERKINS. Hou.~e of Representatives, Congres.I of tb' Lnited States of America, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. PERKINS: I would like to thank you for the support that you have given to library legislation and to express the hope that your interest and support will continue. Both Title I and Title II proJects of ESEA have given aid to our library program, and while we may not be a model of achievement, at least we have been able to near the minimum library standards for Elementary Schools as recommended by the American Library Association. Now we no longer have to limit a child to having only one book checked out at a time-because there were not enough books to go around. We have heeii able to increase the size of the library from one that would seat 3O-i~ students to one that can accommodate 50-60. `We have also been able to take that long step forward toward becoming a materials center. In- stead of just books we can offer both students and faculty filmstrips, posters, pictures, recordings, tapes and a varied number of other non-book materials. Fleming County is a "library minded" community, and they are pleased to have this service improved. Sincerely, WINNIE WRIGHT, Librarian.. Firm in~sh erg Elementary Sc/i ool, Flemingsh iirg Elementary Lihrar,~. CoNGREss OF THE UNITED STATES, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D.C., March. 13, 1967. Hon. CARL PERKINS. Chairman, House Educe fion and Labor (`ommittee, TVashington., D.C. DEAR Ma. CHAIRMAN: I would appreciate it very much if the attached state- ment by Mr. Bruce Miller, Superintendent of Schools, Riverside Unified School District could be included in the hearings being held by your committee this week. I believe Mr. Miller's statement would make an important contribution to your committee's study of the direction of present federal participation in certain educational programs. Your consideration will he greatly appreciated. Kindest regards, JOHN V. TIJNNEY, Member of Congress. STATEMENT OF NEED FOR FEDERAL FUNDS, BY BRUCE MILLER, SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, RIvERsIDE UNrI'IED SCHOOL DIsTRIc'r I would like, first, to express my appreciation for the opportunity to discuss with you today some of my thoughts about the Federal program, particularly those proiects under Title I of PL 89-10. As a school superintendent. I am concerned over the direction of Federal par- ticipation in the support of public education. There is no question if a need for Federal funds. Public education through- out the country is in serious financial difficulty. The Federal Government can play a vital role in financing schools in a three-way partnership-a partnership composed of Federal. State. and local governments. But. as a practicing schi 1 man. faced with the day-to-day problems of operat- ing a school district. I am greatly concerned over the direction w-e've been taking, particulai'ly in Title I of PL Sb-10-the Elementary and Secondary Education discussing some (if our concerns and the problems associated with Title I, I will be talking specifically about the Riverside Unified School District. How- ever. these same problems are reflected throughout the State of California, and the schools of our immediate area-Alvord, Corona, Jurupa. Moreno Valley, etc. Problems There are two very serious probleni" with respect to Title I funds. PAGENO="0889" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1711 1. The 15% reduction in Title I our district and many others had to face this year. (a) Last year Riverside employed 61 people in Title I. This year, because of the reduction, this number was reduced to 43, a net loss of 18 people. (h) As a result of this reduction, the entire Title I reading program was eliminated at the senior high school level, and 2/5 of the program was eliminated at the junior high level. While the elementary schools were spared as much as possible, they too were affected through a loss of teacher aides and other supporting services which had previously enabled the prep- aration of special learning materials for each child. (c.) If the 8.5% level is maintained next year, the loss of i5ç~ over a two- year period will be cumulative. This loss is compounded through the effects of normal inflationary trends. (d.) We have tied in the Title I funds with the district's program of inte- gration. By next September, Riverside will have totally implemented its Master Plan for School Integration, and will have gone in a two-year period from a district with three de facto segregated schools to one of racial bal- ance among all schools. Throughout this period, we have said that mere physical integration is not enough-accompanying it must be provisions for programs for low-socio-economic youngsters-to provide them with the edu- cational background and incentives that they can compete on more equal terms with the more affluent children with whom they are not integrated. If we fall down in this respect, we threaten the very foundation of the prin- ciple of integration. I do not believe we can afford that risk. 2. In addition to the problems related to program, there is an even deeper one related to the indefiniteness of Federal funds--to the point that we don't know how to plan from year to year. (a.) Sound educational planning is one of the chief requisites of school administration. It is a basic of basics. (h.) From a planning standpoint, it would be better to have no program at all than to plan on one then have to reduce it. (c.) The chief difficulty in this respect is personnel. We want good people on our projects-so we place our best staff members in the Federally fi- nanced programs-and bring in others to take their places in the rest of the program. Once these people are ilaced-and the project is reduced-some of the project staff then has to be reabsorhed in the regular program-in turn dislocating those who had been employed to take their place. Thus, it is not only the Federal project which is disrupted, but some aspects of the district's total program. (d.) The urgent need is to know well in advance (as much as two years would be desirable)-in ample time to make the necessary personnel shifts- to know whether we're going to get 85%, 90%, 100% or less than 85%- for the years ahead. Without this lead time, we are forced into last minute planning. People affected by sudden readjustments become increasingly disenchanted with Federal funds. The needs 1. 1 have already pointed out that niost schools are in financial trouble. River- side is no exception. Last year we were forced to trim $450000 from our pro- grain to balance the budget. Next year, we are faced with another $700,000 reduction, and have no guarantee of the success of a proposed tax election or of an increase in state funds. 2. In this kind of a climate, the district is in enough of a financial turmoil- without the added problems related to the indefiniteness of Federal funds. 3. The district-an(I other districts in the state and country-need the Fed- eral projects. Riverside perhaps has a special need because of its integration program. Ours was the first rritle I project approve(l in the State of California. We think we have made wise ai~d ju(liCious use of the funds-and we would pro~ pose most earnestly that they be continued-and even expanded. Recommendations Having proposed that Federal funds be continued, I would hope that certain conditions could be imposed that would make a significant difference to school people across the country. 1. That we have a greater assurance from year-to-year of the level at which we can plan on Federal funds-whether it is to be 95% or 100% or 50%-it is important to know in order to plan our programs. 2. That school districts know well in advance of what the projected funds will be-again so that planning can l)e done and the projects can be tied in with the regular program to provide the most effective possil)le education. PAGENO="0890" 1712 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 3. That states have a greater degree of flexibility in the distribution of funds. a.) The present use of rigid formulas causes hardships among districts. b.) t all counties and districts use their allocations. c.~ Those unused funds should he transferable to other districts which (an use theni and which have worthwhile programs. d.) The states should have the flexibility to make these adjustments as necessary-without having to adhere to rigid formulas. 4. That serious consi(leration be given to a change of emphasis toward general support to supplement the categorical aid now used as the basis for Federal pro- grams. Such a direction would provide a greater degree of flexibility at the dis- trict level and would help districts with their serious educational and financial l)rObl ems. OMAHA PUBLIC SCHOOLS, Omaha, Nebr., February 23, 1967. Hon. CARL D. PERKINS Chairman., Committee on Education and Labor, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN PERKINS: It is my understanding that the House Educa- tion and Labor Committee will soon be conducting hearings on the National Teacher Corps. it is. therefore, respectfully requested that this letter be read into the proceedings of the committee hearings. The School District of Omaha along with the University of Omaha has been involved in the National Teacher Corps program (luring the past year. The trainees have been carefully selected and are outstanding candidates for teaching in central city schools. Dr. Floyd T. Waterman. director of the University of Omaha NTC Unit, and Dr. Paul J. Turnquist. assistant superintendent in charge of personnel in the Omaha schools, have worked diligently and effectively in making the training Phase of this program an outstanding experience for the participants. It is our professional j u(lgment that the NTC prograill represents an excellent l)Otentia 1 source for educators interested in and committed to working with children in the poverty areas of our American cities. It is our sincere hope that this testimony from the local level will be of sonic benefit to your committee in supporting the National Teacher Corps program. Without a sufficient supply of interested. dedicated, and professionally competent personnel. ninny of the federally reimbursed educational programs will not func- tion effectively. Respectfully yours. OWEN A. KNUTZEN, Acting Superintendent of Scliool~ STATEMENT BY WILLIAM T. LOGAN. JR.. COMMISsIONER OF EDUCATION, STATE OF MAINE Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: My name is William T. Logan, Jr. I urn Corniiiissioner of Education for the State of Maine. The following information is presented regarding the operation of P. L. 89-10, Tl~e Elementary and Secondary Education Act, in the State of Maine. The various titles have provided additional funds for the education of Maine children :111(1 have been used to god advantage. Title f-Education of Ch ildren of Low-Incoin c Families For the fiscal year ItH~L'i-19G6. 4)15 projects were approved for a total expendi- tUi'e of 83.735,3~4.5O. The projects by major areas were as follows Reading and basic elemneiitary school subjects 222 Matliemi~aties, science and social studies 20 Pre-sclc'ud and kindergarten 6 Education of the handicapped ii Art. music. health and physical olucation 17 Bus hiess education and terIllin;i I coitm'~es 30 Books, supplies and equipment 159 Total 465 From the personnel standpoint, 450 teacher aides and 150 teacher assistants were employed. In the construction and facilities area, 11 projects including 17 portable or mobile classrooms were approved for an expenditure of $193,334. Within these PAGENO="0891" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1713 projects 37,877 public school pupils and 1342 non-public school pupils were served. In summary. Title I, ESEA has been effectively administered at the state level without undue interference from the United States Office of Education. Federal guidelines have been adequate and have allowed sullieient flexibility for state administration. Title 11-Se/i ool Library and IflstrllctiOn(ll Mat( ria1.'~ The State of Maine has made good and full use of Title II finids amounting to $525,829. The state has served as the agency for distribution of hooks and instructional materials to eligible non-public schools. Title 111-Supplementary Educational Centers and Scrrice Maine was allotted $659,025 under this title for fiscal 1966. Maine school officials worked industriously on these projects and had the distinction of preparing and submitting more projects than many other states. The scope of the projects indicated ingenuity and stressed creative thinking and innovation. We recommend that the statute be aiiiended to give the State Department of Education authority to approve Title III projects as state officials are in a posi- tion to know the needs of local schools and their ability to carry on worthy proJects. Title V-Strcngt/iening Leadership Resources of State Educational Agencies Maine was allotted $143,000 for the purpose of strengthening the leadership resources of the Department. In the administration of the title, the state has been given considerable latitude in identifying its needs and designing programs to meet those needs. Projects have included In-service Training For Profes- sional Staff, Employment of a Coordinator of Federal Assistance Programs. A Language Arts Supervisor, Adult Education Supervisor. Coordinator of Teacher Education Programs, and in the Fine Arts field a Supervisor of Music and an- other for Art. These programs should go a long way to strengthen the services rendered by the Department to local units. With regard to the proposed amendment to Title V to establish a five-year program of grants to states by the Commissioner of Education for programs of comprehensive. systematic and continuous planning and for evaluation of edu- cation at all levels, it is strongly recommended that the State 1)epartment of Education he designated in the statute as the agency to be responsible for carry- ing out or supervising the carrying out of the conipreheiisive planning and ex- penditure of funds tlierefor. It is iiiy opinion that an expenditure of funds under this amendment by the Department of Eucation could (ontrililite substantially to the improvement of education in this state. CoNGREss OF THE UNIiI:a ~`1ATE5, I-lousE oi~ RI:rimsi:xIATIvE5. Washtioqton. J).(., hare/i 2.1967. Hon CARL D. PERKINs, Chairmao, C(nnmittee on Education and Labor. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR CARL: Recently I appeared with several schools from my district in hear- ings before hearing examiners in which the 1)epartment of Education, through its General Counsel, appeared in the position of making a case for `withholding funds." These schools had completely desegregated, iii that all students w-ere given complete freedom of choice. Nevertheless. I understand that the hearing officials have in one case and apparently are likely to make a similar finding in others that the Commissioner of Education has the right to withhold funds un- less a plan is submitted and effectuated for integration, eveui if it requires orders of the school district officials anti is against the wishes of the student and liar- ents. This appears tome to be in violation of Title 4, Section 401(b) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In connection with these cases I filed the enclosed menloran(iuIIl brief. One of the main reasons given through the years for opposition to our Federal edu- cation programs is that it would lead to complete Federal control of our schools. The hearings in the cases in which I was present clearly show that unless your committee takes action to overrule the Commissioner, that is exactly what ~vihl happen. In that connection I w-ould point out we have every right to presume that the primary purpose of the Department of Education was anti is to help education. Accepting that, it must follow that since funds are essential to education-and federal funds promote education-that the desire of the Department should be to find ways to aid, rather than means to cut off funds. PAGENO="0892" 1714 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS I therefore argue this matter in that light-to say that the primary function of the Department of Education is to bring about integration (against the wishes of the people of both or all races) would be to abdicate its whole purpose; yet that is what is being done. The Department of Education is requiring a pledge not to abide by the Civil Rights Act, but by guidelines; which in turn go beyond the Civil Rights Act. by calling for "voluntary" action to propose plans by the local school district and finding fault with each, the Department of Education is forcing or attempting to force assignment to maintain Negro-White ratios-which is prohibited by the Civil Rights Act. Title 4, Section 401(b), of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, reads as follows: Desegregation' means the assignment of students to public schools and within such schools without regard to their race, color, religion, or National origin, but "(leseyregation" xliall not in eon the assignment of students to pub- lic schools in order to overcome racial "imbalance." Even the revised guidelines prohibit what is being forced, by threat, on a "voluntary" basis: "Sec. iS1..~2. Officials Not to Influence Choice No official, teacher, or employee of the school system may require or re- quest any student or prospective student to submit a choice form during the choice period other than by the prescribed letter, notice, and choice form. After the choice period, the school system must make all reasonable efforts to obtain a completed choice form from any student who has not exercised a choice. However, at no time may any official, teacher, or employee of the school system, either directly or indirectly, seek to influence any pa~ent, stu- dent, or any other person involved, in. the e~xercise or a choice, or favor or penalize any person because of a choice made. Information concerning choices made by individual students or schools to which they are assigned may not be made public." Abolishing schools or other actions to create racial balance against the wishes of students and parents in the South is the same as requiring bussing in the cities of the North. What the Department of Education seeks to force, "racial balance," must not be one thing in the South and another in the North, merely because the actions to bring it about are different. The use of force is common to both, the end result is the same, and the use of force was prohibited by the Congress. We must prohibit use of Educational funds to pressure, to interfere with, or otherwise attempt to control or change the operation of local public schools where there is freedom of choice of attendance extended to all students to attend any school in such district. Should you wish me to, I will be glad to appear in support of our position. Thanking you for your consideration, I am. Cordially yours, JAMIE L. WHITTEN, Member of Con gess. OMAHA TRIBAL COUNCIL, Macy, Nebr., March 8, 1967. Hon. (`ART. D. PERKINs. House of Representatives, Congress of the United States. TVasl~n.gton, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN PERKINS: Enclosed herewith is copy of letter forwarded to Senator Hruskn requesting his support in the retention of the National Teachers Corps. Request that your Committee exert every effort in continuing educational opportuiiities under this program. Your assistance in this matter is appreciated. ~incere~y yours. AI,FRED W. GILPIN, Chairman. MARCH 8, 1967. Hon. ROMAN L. TIRUSKA, ~ Senate, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR ITRU5KA: I take this opportunity to express to you the thoughts of the Omaha Tribal Council regarding the National Teachers Corps. The Uni- versity of Omaha is sponsoring and educating twenty corps members under the expert leadership of Dr. Floyd T. Wcterman, Project Director of the ~ationa1 Teachers Corps in Omaha and Macy. There is emphasis for the first time on PAGENO="0893" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS 1715 preparing teachers for the disadvantaged or poverty stricken areas. In our opinion, it is extremely important that Congress act now to continue the National Teachers Corps in the Macy Public Schools. At present we are trying to up- grade the general educational opportunities of our children through' (1) A Head Start Program, (2) Extended day classes, and (3) Neighborhood Youth Corps projects. Recently, we have read several accounts as to the importance of follow-up educational programs for the Head Start Program. This is exactly what the Teacher Corps is doing in our elementary school system. Along with this, the Corps members have helped with the extended day classes and with the Neighborhood Youth Corps project. It performs an extremely valuable service that is not offered by any other agency in our community. We are sure that you are familiar with the course that the Corps has taken, as well as the educational gaps that it hopes to fill. Originally, Congress author- ized the Teacher Corps-especially conceived to develop new and better ways to educate poor children-with a nine and one-half million dollar appropriation in 1965. Under this authorization the U.S. Office of Education offered college graduates special training for teaching in school districts of great poverty, and the chance to use part of their time to work toward a masters degree at a nearby university. A double boon-more specially qualified teachers for very poor school districts, and more potentially qualified teachers getting ready to help meet the national deficiency of 100,000 teachers. In competing against such a shortage of teachers, it is inevitable that the schools in poor districts would suffer most and usually end up with the least qualified. These are some of the compelling reasons why the National Teachers Corps has been praised by almost every professional educational group in the country-national, state, and local-as being well conceived, urgently needed, and practical. From on the scene observations in Macy. we have observed the four corps members at work and are very impressed with their realistic arid determinative approach to the problems they have encountered. The impact they have made upon our local educational system has been felt by every Irerson in our com- munity. Their accomplishments far out-weigh the cost of the program to the government. President Johnson stated in his inaugural address that it would be the duty of the federal administration to promote opportunities for the American Indian which would enhance and expand their participation in American society, or to place them in the "mainstream" of American life. This cannot be considered lightly, and cannot be resolved within two decades. The proposed "Omnibus Bill" which is being prepared for submission to Congress by the Commissioner of Indian Affairs cannot solve the problems of American Indians and we have repeatedly opposed this proposed legislation at various meetings throughout the nation. Recommendations which we submitted to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs stressed the need of education, health. housing and employment on Indian reser- vations. These recommendations have not been included in the proposed Indian legislation. Education of our youth is the forethought of every Indian tribal council in the nation, and we realize that the President's wishes cannot be car- ried out until we prepare the present generation for their way in life by proper educational opportunities. The Teachers Corps is.just a step in the right direction. As you are well aware, the National Teachers Corps has been funded only through June, i9~V7. If after this time the Corps has not received additional appropriations it w-ill he doomed, and Macy will lose a valuable community asset. In view of this, we urgently request that you and your colleagues favor- able consider continuation of the National Teachers Corps. Sincerely yours, AI~F1*:n W. (iILPIN. Chairman. AMERICAN ASsOCIATION OF TTNIvF:RsmTy WOMEN, Wash inaton. 1).(.. ]iurc/r 21, 1967. Hon. CARL D. PERKINS, Chairman of Conmnmittee on Education. and Labor, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington. D.C. DEAR MR. PEimniNs: The AAUW would like to he included in the record of the hearings in support of the Elementary and Secondary Education Amend- ments of 1967. As you and many members of tire Committee know from our many appearances before your Coimimittee tire AAUW' is staunch in its belief in generous funding for the nation's public schools. We believe equally in Fed- eral sharing of financial support. PAGENO="0894" 1716 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDFCATION AMENDMENTS \Ve continue to support assistance programs for disadvantaged children and the Teacher Corps pr grain. We believe progress already has been made under the Teacher Corps ;Iii(l are of the opinion that under proper funding it could prove increasingly effective. We believe the steps taken in the legislation to clarity local control provisions and to provide for state agency approval will be helpful. We ii AAUW have been concerned for many years that Indian children be given eitijIl educal I tail opportunities and welcome any efforts in that direction. We also ~cisli to express our approval of efforts to assist the education of the hatidica pied. has teen the flositioli of the Association for many years that a critical link in the nation's school systeili was the state agency. Therefore we welcome the atteiii~ Is to streiigtheii this link which are to he found in HR 6230. As we have stid 1 this Conimittee in other years, in our estimation, one f I lie ni st ii t hal pr~ bleins facing our schools under programs providing Fed- eral i~sistti1c is tie' unccrta Ilty. the inability to program effectively which every sell asliiiinist rotor faces each year because lie hasn't accurate infornia- tin it out his res ar as t r the c ttung year. This problem is created, as every meitiher it' this C iiiniitt'e knows, by the fact that enactment of authoriza- till a iii aIhi' lria~ j ii legisiati a so often occurs substantially after the be- niitng of tlte sd 1 year and certainly months after the planning has been ilono fr lie sIt 1 yea r hr which the Olin print ions are made. We sincerely hope this r'~ tnnht'ee ~vil1 liii salle solution to this problem which we believe to be particularly troubhseiii' at the eleiiieiitary and secondary school level. Dr. VICTORIA SCHUNK, C/i airman, Legisia tire Program Co7nnhittee. Dr. Lois ROTH, Aria Reprcsciitotice. Edueatien Le~;islati cc Program Committee. SEATTLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS, Seattle, Wash., March 30, 1967. lion. CAaL D. PERKINS, Cliaoinan, House Education and Labor Committee, House Office Building. Was/i ington, D.C. DEAR MR. PEIiKItcS: The Elementary and Secondary Education Act funds allocated to our school district during the past two years have enabled the com- munity, and the professional staff, to design innovative programs for the children of economically impoverished families. Yoti may be assured, we have tried to eliminate the deep-rooted causes of the learning disabilities among these children. If the program is continued, some permanent solution may be the result. We urge you and the members of your committee to support a full appropriation for PL 89-10 during 1967-68. Sincerely yours, FORBES BOTTOMLY, Superintendent of Schools. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, Lansing, Mich., March 31, 1967. Hon. CARL D. PERKINs. Chairman. House Committee on Education and Labor, House of Rcpresentatires. Was/i ington, D.C. DEAR CoNGREsSMAN PERKINS: I am sorry that I was unable to attend the hearings on the President's Elementary and Secondary Education Bill. I do have sonic reactions to portions of it which I would like to present for your Committees consideration. The President~s proposal for a $44 million appropriation for adult basic edu- cation is most important to us in Michigan. We have had a disconcerting year in which we have had to shorten the hours per week and reduce the weeks tIer year of adult education available to the peple who are enrolled in those programs in Michigan. We have had to do that because in 1966-liT the Congress did not appropriate to the limit of the :muthorizatiOll. even tl](ugh that limit had to be obtained if the level of pro- grams undertaken in 1965-liG was to be funded. Adult basic education is one of the cornerstones of our program to help the poor audi the deprived. We are spending $258,000 of State aid, $757,000 of Federal aid. and $120,000 of local funds now: and where in 1963 we had only 4.400 enrolled in adult education, today we have 13,000 and tomorrow we can double that with a minimum of recruiting. PAGENO="0895" ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDTCATION AMENDMENTS 1717 Adult basic education combined with MDTA funds or other job placement assistance means a break in the poverty cycle for countless people. It is, in my opinion, sound economics. I endorse the President's proposal for rapid expansion of the Teacher Corps. I am particularly interested in that portion of the proposal which suggests a relationship between the Teacher Corps aiid special progranis such as Migrant Education. It seems to me that this is an area in which the Congress can innovate. For migrant children one of the most difficult educational tasks is to secure continuity in learning. Compacts between states and between districts within states are useful to that end ; but a mobile Teacher Corps which could move with migrants from state to state could be the most useful method to obtain that continuity. Michigan is proposing in its migrant education prograni to finance a university program which will train up to fifty teachers who will then be employed by school districts in migrant education. This could become a Teacher Corps effort. The Teacher Corps offers to altruistic and talented young people an appeal to action. It is this kind of appeal which, in my opinion, encourages able young people to choose a particular career over others. And teaching has not mounted enough of those kind of appeals. We need the Teacher Corps and many similar kinds of programs to increase the attractiveness of teaching to those who want a career of service in an area of excitement. I wish to give emphatic support to the President's recommendation for an appropriation to the states for comprehensive planning. The advent of Federal aid for education has confronted the administrators of our schools with a re- sponsibility for assessing the needs of all their students and establishing a set of priorities from which the most urgent tasks can be chosen. I believe this to be comprehensive planning. And I think it is important that the state, as well as its school districts, undertake such a process. How- ever, a state agency does not have the funds to do this; and Federal aid would he most appropriate and useful to this end. One of the President's recommendations troubles me considerably. That is the proposal to distribute funds for strengthening state departments of educa- tion on a 40% flat grant-60% enrollment ratio. As I understand it, there is a further proposal to merge Title N. NDEA anti NDEA Title III Administration funds into this appropriation and, thus, to distribute that money, too, on the same 40-tb basis. The effect of the President's proposal is to reduce administrative funds available to states with high enrollments. It is a departure, it seems to me, from the customary manner of allotting Federal funds, because it denies the significant relationship which exists between total number of children, volume of programs for these children, and state administrative burden. The one percent administrative sum for Aid to the Economically Deprived, and the five percent administrative sum for Library Materials Aid are not sufficient for state management of those programs. "Title V" money must be available as a supplement. It should be available, also, for a state's costs to asskt in ESEA Supplementary Services programs. It certainly should be avail- able to enable a state to build its own programs to dimensions appropriate to the sheer numbers of pupils in the state. If it is necessary to recognize the problems of smaller or sparsely-settled states, this could, in my opinion, be done by a separate appropriation which would not come out of the present Title V grant. I hope that the Committee has had an opportunity to examine the present operation of Title I, ESEA. The inadequacy of appropriations recommended by the President-$1.2 billion-hardly needs mention to your Committee, which has authorized a program requirinr at least $2.2 billion for l9tb7-6~. I w-ould like to discuss briefly the allocation formula which is being used to distribute funds to school districts. 1960 Census data and 1965 AFDC data are neither current nor precise enough to describe relative concentrations of poverty as between school districts. Sig- nificant inequities creep into the allocations of funds within counties and cause the public to question the distribution of money, Yet in the information collected by government agencies such as the Internal Revenue Service, there is information on income distribution which can be com- bined with welfare recipient data and school district pupil count to produce an adequate picture, updated yearly, of the burden which respective school districts bear. PAGENO="0896" 1718 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS I believe that where one to two billion dollars is involved the Federal Govern- ment should accept an obligation to sharpen its distribution technique; and that the Congress should appropriate to the Office of Education, a sum of money which will be used expressly to devise a more accurate and more current in- dicator of concentrations of poverty. Finally, I would urge the Committee to consider authorizing the Office of Education to extend the period of encumbrance on administrative funds. Local educational agencies now are authorized to encumber educational grant money to August 30; but funds for state administration must be closed out at the end' of the fiscal year. This is an inconsistency. It is particularly troublesome when congressional appropriations are not made until late in the fiscal year. It means, in effect. that the states are drawing upon next year's funds to administer present year programs. In elementary and secondary education the need today continues to be money, but along with money there is a necessity for hard-headed assessment of the results of the use of that nioney. I believe it incumbent on the Congress to appropriate the full authorization of 1966; but I believe too, that it is incumbent on each of the states to achieve an assessment of the social benefit of Federal programs. This assessment should enable the Congress and the public to judge what progress has been made; how well we are doing what we have tried to do; how better we can do it. The most dramatic effect on the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to date has been the evocation of a sense of urgency about the problems of the poor and a readiness to innovate. The task now is to build solidly on that interest. Sincerely yours, IRA POLLEY. (The following editorial was submitted by Congressman Brademas:) [Life ~ditorials] Ax EI)UCATIONAL BARGAIN WORTH KEEPING While the (lraft gets plenty of attention in Congress, a small, valuable, but little-known program may die of congressional inattention. It is the National Teacher Corps. The Teacher Corps serves in the combat areas of American education-in the schools of the slums and the rural poor. In 29 states, its 1,200 corpsmen pay special attention to `culturally deprived" children, whose schooling must provide values and training that their homes do not. Teacher Corps teams-each con- sisting of a veteran of about five years' experience in slum schools, aided by from three to 10 young teacher interns-go into these schools by invitation only. They work tinder the close supervision of community school officials, who can fire or transfer them on a day's notice. There are plenty of safeguards, in short, against federal government meddling in local schools. But because it lacks any effective lobby on Capitol Hill, the Teacher Corps's budget was shrunk to ~ million, which runs out this June. With that modest amount, the corps has been able to reach a quarter of a million children with a variety of unorthodox teaching techniques. Corpsmen make frequent home visits to encourage parents, whose previous dealings with school officials too ofteti have heem~ only to hear complaints. Rock `n' roll songs may be played in the class with the hope that these often uncommunicative youngsters will learn to express themselves by explaining what they think the lyrics mean. Their reading assignments call be on their special folk heroes, such as prizefighters, ;tiid they learn maiheniatics by computing gas mileage for the hotrods they so admire. The Teacher Corps iiiteriis who conduct such classes are also studying part- time at universities neai'by. In two years, with the federal government paying their tuition, they can earn masters' degi'ees in education. Eighty percent of tlieni have said they want to stay on in slum schools whose greatest problem is a chronic shortage of qualified teachers. Outside of Congress. the Teacher Corps has won impressive support fi'omn the Natimial Eduatimi Asso~iation and the American Federation of Teachers. Prac- tially every s(h~4l which has corpsnien this year wants more of them iiext year. Tile Teacher Corps needs a suppleniental stopgap appropriation of $12.5 million by the nhi(ldIe of April to set up sunimer training programs for the 2.400 new interns the Administration has recommended, and an additional $36.5 million to carry the corps thu ugh the full fiscal year. At these prices, it remains the best bargain in the federal education program.