Florida education financed program. Where you have a high cost vocational education program, extra dollars are provided to school districts so if they choose to offer high cost vocational education programs they will be awarded or reimbursed because of that effort. Several years ago this was not the case, and the high cost vocational education program there was no additional money to run that program and the school system simply had to pay the extra cost for providing it. I think we are in about our second or third year and the State has a system whereby additional dollars are generated if it is a high cost program. Mrs. FRANKLIN. Mr. Lincoln said that you have about $18 million from the CETA program of which about $9 million was spent on title I training programs. How much do you get, say, a year on your basic grants for voc ed? Mr. STANDRIDGE. For the Dade County system as a result of the addition of the high cost programs that amount of money that Mr. LEHMAN. May I interrupt. Talking about Federal funds only? Mrs. FRANKLIN. Yes. Mr. STANDRIDGE. The State has about $14 million that is used in that activity of which I think Dade County gets in the neighborhood of $1 million or maybe a little bit more than $1 million of the total amount. Mr. LEHMAN. You get $1 million of Federal assistance funds? Mr. STANDRIDGE. Yes. This does not include the manpower funds. It is a little bit more than $1 million. Mrs. FRANKLIN. It sort of points up what the National Advisory Council on Vocational Education has pointed out for a good many years about our priorities in spending; does it not? Mr. STANDRIDGE. It sure does because the State is matching local funds to a very large percentage. In fact, Dade County will be receiv ing approximately $42 million to $43 million overlapping funds in Vocational support as compared to $1 million from the Federal support. Mrs. FRANKLIN. Just one more question. That critical GAO report-I have not had a chance to read all your testimony, Mr. Lincoln-it seems to address itself to the lack of cooperative effort between industry and voc ed people. Do you think that there were any justifiable criticisms in the GAO report on this business of too much building, too much money spent for construction and not enough cooperative arrangements with business? Mr. STANDRIDGE. Well, as far as our State is concerned I have been complaining because we have not put any dollars in construction. We simply have not been using it for construction. It is being used for catalytic purposes to provide new kinds of programs, to expand existing programs and this type of thing and we have been trying to get more construction dollars for that purpose. I think the GAO report is certainly a very needed kind of report. Now I am sure that a lot of the statements were taken from statistics that were available but there is much more that needs to be said about why are these things happening, why are certain dollars going here and not going there. I just happen to believe that in most of the states that I have had experience with that the State department of education are certainly trying to do what they think is best in the way in which dollars are being spent. For instance, regardless of what size the district is that is, the local system-if the attitude on the part of that local system is to not really provide a quality program for vocational education, then I don't think Federal dollars ought to be channeled to that district just on the basis they have the population. If they want to do something once they get those dollars, then I think it is competitive in that respect and I think it needs to be spent for those systems that will do some good with it. Mrs. FRANKLIN. Thank you. Mr. LEHMAN. Let me just pursue one question and then we can sort of wrap this up unless Congressman Pressler has anything else to add. Five or six years ago we had a high school in Miami Beach that was more or less a-they had no vocational program and about 99 percent of the kids went from that high school to the colleges and the test scores were probably the highest in the county. Then in the court order we integrated that school by sending about 600 or 700 of the inner-city schoolchildren, taking them out of a vocational school situation at Miami-Jackson and busing them to Miami Beach where they had no vocational program. Now what you are telling me this morning is that you are now constructing a vocational wing on to the Miami Beach senior high school so that the people that we are busing in there from the inner city can have an opportunity as they had before to learn a vocational skill. Now that concerns me is what I was pursuing a minute ago. What effort are you going to make in that school to be able to put not only the inner-city kids, the disadvantaged kids into the vocational program of this new wing, but what effort are you going to make to put the young people from Miami Beach into the vocational program? If you do put them in that program, they are not necessarily going to follow the vocation in the same proportion as inner-city kids and then your percentages are going to go down and you are going to look like you are doing less of a job because some of them are not going to end up in the job market. Do you understand what I am saying? Mr. STANDRIDGE. I think I understand your concern, Mr. Lehman. Mr. LEHMAN. That is what Dr. Sheppard was talking about. Mr. STANDRIDGE. I might add just one little note here. Back in 1973 we conducted a student survey for all students in the system from the 8th through the 12th grade and the purpose of this survey was to try to determine from the students' viewpoint at that time, realizing, of course, that many students were not equipped to answer some of the kinds of questions, but one of the basic questions that we were asking the student was this: We listed 100 occupations, some of which were professional and some of which were what we call nonprofessional, did not require a 4-year college degree. We asked the student to choose the type of occupation that he would like to work in when he finished school. This represented about 80.000 kids; 63 percent indicated that their first choice of an occupation was in the nonprofessional category. Now something has changed in the way of the image if 63 percent of the kids then were selecting occupations that were nonprofessional when about 3 years prior to that time another survey was conducted which indicated only 40 percent were interested in working in those types of occupations. Now this did not all come about by chance. I think the labor market picture was obvious to many kids. They could see schoolteachers working as cocktail waitresses, they could see them working as clerks in department stores with advanced degrees. They could see engineers who were out of work pumping gas and this kind of thing. Mr. LEHMAN. Well, I can just tell you, if I may interrupt you, in my district and I had a Buick dealership there that for the first time during the last couple of years I had Jewish mothers asking me to get their sons into the training facility at the General Motors Technical Center in Jacksonville, and these are the same mothers that used to want me to get their kids into medical school. Mr. STANDRIDGE. That is right. The pendulum is swinging the other way. I might also add, Congressman, with the input of the educational specialists and getting students with more information about careers and this type of thing it has done a terrific job in changing the kids' minds in terms of what they want to be when they go into the world of work. Mr. LEHMAN. Thank you very much. I would encourage the panel to stay around for tomorrow because tomorrow we are going to have the diversified education people here that are going to try to tell us how well the vocational program will run if you just let the young people work part time and go to school part time. I think, Dean, you are going to be here tomorrow for the DECCA program. Mr. GRIFFIN. Congressman, we will have all six of the student organizations represented tomorrow and DECCA is included. Mr. LEHMAN. Good. So if you are able to stay another day, we will have a very good show for you tomorrow. Thank you again for coming. Mr. STANDRIDGE. Thank you, Congressman. Mr. LEHMAN. It has been very valuable. If you can stay around today for a while, on the floor we will be legislating on the school lunch program and that is another way that we are going to try to assist the kids to stay in our school system. Thank you again. Mr. LINCOLN. Thank you. [Whereupon, at 10:54 a.m., the subcommittee recessed, to reconvene at 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, March 26, 1975.] [Information submitted for inclusion in the record follows:] Hon. CARL D. PERKINS, AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL ARTS ASSOCIATION, Chairman, House Committee on Education and Labor, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN PERKINS: Attached for the consideration of the House Education and Labor Committee and for inclusion in the printed hearing record on vocational education is testimony prepared on behalf of the American Industrial Arts Association. The AIAA commends you for your unwavering support of vocational education. We wish to also express our thanks for taking time from your busy schedule to meet with Dr. Alvin Rudisill, James Good and myself on May 22, regarding the role of industrial arts and the invaluable contributions it makes to vocational education and the career education concept. The Association strongly encourages continued and expanded federal investments in vocational education and the continued inclusion of industrial arts in all vocational education legislation as a viable educational component in: (1) assisting individuals in the making of informed and meaningful occupational choices and (2) assisting in preparing individuals for enrollment in advanced or highly skilled vocational and technical education programs. We vigorously favor career guidance and exploration elements in new legislation for vocational education and emphasize that comprehensive state planning is essential for maximum utilization of the federal investment in meeting manpower and socio-economic needs of all people across the country. We are equally concerned that there be a single state agency to administer and supervise state plans for vocational education (that include industrial arts) to assure program continuity between secondary and postsecondary education, to prevent unnecessary duplication of effort and to ensure program accessibility at advanced levels. Members of the American Industrial Arts Association appreciate the interest and effort that you and the committee have shown toward improving our nation's manpower delivery system and urge favorable consideration of the positions as stated in the attached testimony. Sincerely, DONALD L. RATHBUN, Executive director. PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL ARTS ASSOCIATION INTRODUCTION The American Industrial Arts Association (AIAA) is a nationwide professional organization of over 5,000 active members representing industrial arts teachers, supervisors, and teacher educators working on all levels in our nation's schools. The Association was formed in 1939 for the purpose of improving instruction, curricula and personnel in the teaching of industrial arts and the Association serves as the official liaison between industrial arts and other professional, educational and industrial organizations. Through a cooperative and coordinated effort, the AIAA promotes the teaching of industrial arts at all levels of education in order to ensure maximum efficiency and continuity of educational programs and services for youth and adults. The positions stated in this report have been studied and approved nationally through a formal review process which included two national hearings and one conference devoted to a study of the role of industrial arts in career education and vocational education. The results of these studies have appeared in several recent publications. The inclusion of industrial arts in the Higher Education Act (P.L. 92–318) of 1965, as amended in 1972,under Title 2, Vocational Education, is an indication of congressional foresight and a significant adjunct to the development of a comprehensive educational system. The American Industrial Arts Association greatly appreciates the thought and effort that has gone into such support of industrial arts. Recognizing that several parts of this act will expire on June 30, 1975, and that the committee will shortly begin writing new legislation based on input received from hearings and companion bills already introduced, we have prepared this report. The AIAA hopes it will assist you in better understanding the scope and role of industrial arts and the contributions it can make to our manpower delivery system as well as increasing individual literacy of our industrial-technological culture. INDUSTRIAL ARTS PROGRAM Industrial arts is a component of the total program of education from kindergarten through college, including adult education. It is the study of industry and technology. Such study provides unique opportunities for students to participate in representative experiences in the production of goods or the rendering of services through the effective use of people, methods, machines, money, management and marketing. The students examine effects of industrial technology on all elements of society and the environment in order to provide for industrial-technological understanding, application and conservation. Industrial arts provides the student with information about the world of work and occupational opportunities in industry. It incorporates industrial experiences, both vicarious and "hands on." This type of education develops career awareness and provides experiences in career exploration. Students are assisted in the discovery and development of personal creative technical problem solving abilities, aptitudes, interests, self reliance, judiciousness, resourcefulness and adaptability. These qualities respond to the students' personal needs for living, coping and functioning successfully in a technological society. Specifically, industrial arts curricula consist of experiences which evolve from socio-economic clusters such as construction, manufacturing, communications and transportation. The prime focus is on student "hands on" tactile experiences which are relevant, meaningful and consistent with the identifiable needs of an individual as he/she functions within our technological society. The goals of industrial arts education provide opportunities whereby each student will: 1. Develop insight into and understanding of industry and its place in our culture. 2. Discover and develop talents, interests, attitudes and individual potential related to the industrial-technical areas. 3. Develop abilities in the proper use of tools, machines and processes. 4. Develop problem solving and creative abilities involving materials, processes and products of industry. 5. Interrelate the content on industrial arts with other school subjects in the curriculum. 6. Develop a familiarity with a variety of careers and their requirements. SCOPE AND SEQUENCE Industrial arts involves a large number of teachers and students in the public school systems. The U.S. Office of Education report published in 1966, "Industrial Arts Education-A Survey of Programs, Teachers, Students and Curriculum," cited the existence of 40,000 industrial arts teachers in 1962. It indicated the 63 percent of the nation's junior high schools (grades 7, 8, 9), 67 percent of the juniorsenior high schools (grades 7-12), 91 percent of traditional high schools (grades 9-12) and 66 percent of senior high schools (grades 10-12) offer industrial arts programs. The number had increased by 1970 to 51,000 industrial arts teachers reaching an estimated six million students as reported by the American Council of Industrial Arts Supervisors. It is estimated that these figures and percentages are even higher today. As many as 60,000 teachers are projected to be reaching well over eight million students in industrial arts programs in 1975-1976. Industrial arts learning experiences related to career and vocational education begin at the earliest grades and continue through higher education in order to ensure instruction consistent with individual needs, interests, capabilities and maturity. The following levels or phases have been developed and endorsed by the industrial arts profession to guarantee development of a systematic and sequential management system compatible with the total education structure and elimination of unnecessary and costly duplication of efforts which are detrimental to the education process. ELEMENTARY GRADES (K-6) Self and Career Awareness.-These programs are designed to familiarize students with the many kinds of work people do and the interrelationship of such work in the production and use of work people do and the interrelationship of such work in the production and use of goods and services. In addition, students develop self-awareness in relation to various industrial-technical occupations and fields of study. Industrial arts experience infused in the total elementary instructional program encourages positive attitudes toward work and the relationship between manipulative and cognitive activities. MIDDLE GRADES (7-9) Career Orientation.-Career orientation programs consist of laboratory instruction which provides students with experience in the diverse kinds and stages of activities included in a broad range of industrial pursuits and levels of occupations for which special skills are required. The classroom furnishes a setting for learning various career prerequisites. Through firsthand experiences students become acquainted with the significance of changing and evolving technologies. They |