country employ local school library coordinators or supervisors. The provisions of title IV in the legislation under consideration for library training institutes will do much to remedy this serious deficiency.

Approximately $1.60 per pupil is the average annual amount spent for books in schools with school libraries. This amount does not provide much material for young minds to read, with the average cost of a book from $3 to $4.

School librarians have made every effort to take advantage of the National Defense Education Act; however, because the act does not specifically mention libraries, any provision for strengthening library materials is usually given secondary or minor consideration by those administering the funds. As an example of how one county school system has made every effort to utilize title III of the current National Defense Education Act, I cite for the record the article, "NDEA," by Mrs. Hallie Bacelli, school library supervisor, Guilford County, N.C., which appears in the May 15, 1962, issue of the Library Journal. At this time I should like to make this statement a part of the record. Mr. BAILEY. If there is no objection, it will be accepted for inclusion in the record.

(The document follows:)

[Library Journal, May 15, 1962]

How one State-North Carolina-and specifically one county-Guilford Countymakes use of NDEA

North Carolina has 100 county and 73 city school administrative units. Each of these 173 units has participated extensively in purchasing equipment and materials under title III and title V of the National Defense Education Act. Because the State Board of Education ruled that State-allotted funds could not be used for NDEA, all purchases have been made from local school funds. Since each purchase has required half payment from local funds (under NDEA provision, Federal Government pays other half), expenditures have been highly selective.

DEMOCRATICALLY CONCEIVED

In the beginning, under the leadership of personnel from the State Department of Public Instruction, over 100 representative educators in North Carolina were invited to serve on committees to create guidelines and standards for NDEA purchases. After many conferences, three bulletins of procedures were written: (1) Administrative Guide Title III-NDEA, Part 1, Guidelines (1959): (2) Part II, Standards for Equipment and Materials (1959); (3) Administrative Guide Title V (a) Testing, Guidance, and Counseling. (Available from L. H. Jobe. Director of Publications, State Department of Public Instruction, Raleigh, N.C.). A report on the first year of NDEA, "North Carolina School Libraries Move Ahead," by Cora Paul Bomar, supervisor of library services for the State Department of Public Instruction in Raleigh, appeared in School Libraries, March 1960.

STANDARDS REEVALUATED

In January-March, 1962, the guidelines and standards were reevaluated by large committees. Original philosophy and policies were reaffirmed and minor changes made in the new guidelines. "A Manual for Preparation of Projects Under Title III, NDEA, April 1962," and a manual for title V (a). These bulletins pointed out in detail the exact procedures to follow under North Carolina laws and regulations, gave comprehensive lists of allowable equipment and materials. Directions for planning projects to strengthen teaching in the fields of science, mathematics, and modern foreign languages, and to strengthen the program in testing, guidance and counseling were given.

1 Mrs. Bacelli is director of libraries for the Guilford County Schools, Greensboro, N.C.

At first, the advisory committee on library and audiovisual materials vetoed, as undemocratic, the idea of making master lists of materials in each field, and instead listed approved sources and principles of selection. But in the March 1962 review of standards and guidelines, the group suggested that verified master lists could be so prepared as to refrain from dictating local level purchases, and would be valued and welcomed professional aids for selecting and purchasing materials. Master lists are to be prepared in the summer of 1962, not as restrictive, but as suggested, aids, especially valuable to those administrative units without professional librarians.

LOCAL SELECTION

Edited materials, such as books, films, filmstrips, recordings, maps, and globes have been evaluated at the local level under the usual principles basic to good school library selection. To satisfy North Carolina legal requirements, all purchases of items usually labeled "equipment" have been made through the purchase and contract division of the State department of administration, but selected from "allowable lists" at the local level. The purchase and contract division assumed responsibility for verifying standards and specifications of manufacture and competitive fair price codes. Catalogs of contract items have been supplied by the purchase and contract division for each unit.

The Guilford County schools (Greensboro, N.C.) have been among the State's top purchasers of library materials and audiovisual equipment under NDEA, since the start of the program in 1959. As instructional centers, Guilford County school libraries have benefited greatly from the purchase of general audiovisual equipment; but the outstanding purchases have been those of books to enrich teaching units. Below are three tables which may be of interest to persons setting up NDEA programs. Table I gives enrollment and library statistics in Guilford County since 1959. Table II shows quantity of library materials purchased under NDEA since 1959. Table III gives approximate

expenditures for the different types of materials purchased.

Immediately prior to the NDEA implementation in North Carolina, new basal textbooks had been adopted in science, grades 4 to 8, and arithmetic, grades 3 to 8; also some new basal texts at the high-school level had been adopted. New basal texts for each elementary child; new manuals for the teachers; countywide inservice workshops to introduce teachers to new materials, methods, and techniques; plus the opportunities provided by NDEA to double the purchasing dollar were the needed stimuli for increasing enriched teaching programs. Before the first NDEA purchases in Guilford County, the new basal textbooks were studied, and charts made of units taught at each grade level. Suggested books, films, filmstrips, recordings, and other enrichment materials were listed, in order to provide for all children. A book exhibit of over 1,400 science and mathematics library books was opened for 2 weeks. Books were arranged by teaching units in grade groups of 1 to 4, 4 to 6, 7 to 9, 10 to 12. This exhibit was attended by over 600 teachers and committees of over 6,000 pupils, to select books for their school libraries. A simple listing, by grade level and unit, of films owned in science tripled the use of films and increased the need for equipment and new films.

The second year, additional books were displayed and a master list of books provided as checklists and order sheets for teachers and librarians. Provisions were made for previews of filmstrips and films.

TABLE II.-Library materials purchased under title III

The third year, all books were reevaluated. About 600 titles were removed from the master lists because they were out of date, inaccurate, or superseded by better titles. All classification numbers were verified and standardized by the new edition of "Dewey Decimal Classification" (16th revised ed.).

For the fourth year purchases, Guilford County will purchase from the master lists of 1961-62 and supplementary lists of books published since March of 1961. Additional titles will be added at the local level for the books which meet standards. The master lists included:

1. Science library books-grades 1-9 (100 basic, 300 second choice, and 1,200 other titles).

2. Science library books-senior high (20 basic, 91 second choice, and 434 other titles, plus general science selections from grades 1-9 list).

3. Math library books-grades 1-12 (124 titles).

4. Science library books-grades 1-9, 1962 supplement (210 titles).

5. Science library books--senior high school, 1962 supplement (66 titles).

6. Math library books-grades 1-12, 1962 supplement (14 titles).

7. Materials and books-for use by students of French 1 and 2.

NDEA has proved to be a boon to us in Guilford County. ing gains are:

Some of the result

Increased use of library and audiovisual materials in all subject areas.
More teachers accepting principles of scientific methods of instruction.
Problem solving and unit plan of teaching.

Increased enrichment in library research.

New, interesting books shelved in the 500-639 and biography sections bring color, life, and a facelifting to the entire library collection, increasing its general appeal.

Obsolete materials discarded when replaced with the newer materials. Fewer complaints from librarians that teachers just don't use the library. Guilford County and North Carolina librarians are strong supporters also of the proposed expanded title X, part A, of the National Defense Education Act (S. 2345), reported by the Senate Labor and Public Welfare Committee in 1961 (S. Rept. 652). This proposed legislation would authorize matching grants to State education agencies to assist them in establishing and maintaining total programs of library services in public elementary and secondary schools.

Miss BOMAR. In recent years many States have exerted great effort to provide quality school library service; however, no State has been able to develop through its own efforts a strong statewide program of quality school library service.

The State of North Carolina is cited as an example of one State that over the years has emphasized school library development. Since 1903 North Carolina has given increased support to school libraries through State appropriations. For the past 32 years North Carolina has promoted a statewide program of school library development through the State department of public instruction under the leadership of a State supervisor of school library services.

This school year has been a year of rapid progress in the development of North Carolina school libraries; however, this progress has not been enough to provide adequate school libraries. The past general assembly increased the State library maintenance allotment from 50 cents to $1 per pupil, a total expenditure of from $536,210 to over $1 million annually. This increase has made it possible for schools to purchase more books than ever before. Through the State personnel allotment for special services the number of school librarians has increased from 558 to a total of 963.

Even though North Carolina schools have made progress there still remains much to be done to attain an adequate level of school library service. Analysis of needs reveals that more than 50 percent of the schools in North Carolina are still without the services of qualified librarian. Only 25 of the total 173 school administrative units have library supervisors and there are no State and Federal funds allocated for the training of school librarians.

North Carolina has over 61% million volumes in its school libraries, or 6.5 books per pupil. A well-stocked school library should have at least 10 books per pupil. North Carolina needs to spend at least $3 per pupil per year for library books alone to meet accepted standards. The State appropriation is $1 per pupil per year for all library materials and supplies, including binding.

North Carolina would benefit appreciably by the passage of the proposed amendments to the Library Services Act for this comprehensive library bill would provide approximately $830,000 in Federal funds to be matched by about $432,000 from State or local sources that could be used to purchase school library materials and equipment; to do minor remodeling of inadequate facilities; and to strengthen school library supervision at the local level in public elementary and secondary schools. Approval of this measure would make it possible for all 173 school administrative units in North Carolina to provide guidance and leadership in developing strong systemwide library programs, and to strengthen library collections by adding many more books and audiovisual materials.

North Carolina was chosen as an example of a State that has exerted great effort toward attaining quality school library service; however, the present status of development in North Carolina public schools illustrates quite forcibly that Federal aid is needed in those States that have, over the years, made conscientious efforts to carry the burden of support alone, as well as in the 17 States that do not have at the State level even one qualified person to plan for and assist with the development and improvement of school libraries.

According to the library consultant of the county board of education, Jefferson County is

the only county in Alabama that has any money allotted by the board regularly for books and this is only 35 cents per pupil annually.

In the State of Washington the supervisor of school library services stated recently that in relation to national standards—

our school libraries lack adequate staff, quarters, materials, and financial support. We have only one librarian serving more than 1,000 children in elementary and secondary schools, instead of the recommended one for every 400.

Just as these States would benefit from the passage of the proposed legislation, so would all the States.

The effect of the Library Services Act has given ample proof of what a modest amount of Federal funds can do to stimulate the development of rural public libraries. We are sure that the same needed results for the other types of libraries would be achieved through this pending legislation. The Nation as a whole would be able to move forward on a unified basis toward comprehensive library development. This coordinated national program would involve public libraries in both rural and metropolitan areas, public elementary and secondary school libraries, libraries of institutions of higher education, and would provide for the training of librarians necessary to staff such libraries, to meet the increased educational, informational and research requirements of the people of our Nation.

In view of this testimony and the testimony that has preceded, the American Library Association, and its division, the American Association of School Librarians, therefore, urgently recommend that H.R. 11823 be given favorable consideration by this committee and that it be passed by the Congress.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, for your courtesy in permitting me to present this testimony for the American Library Association.

Mr. BAILEY. Mr. Scott, have you some questions?

Mr. SCOTT. Miss Bomar, you point out in your testimony that more than 40,000 of the public schools have no libraries at all. What library service do children have in those schools? Is anything available to them?

Miss BOMAR. Congressman Scott, I do not know that I can give you a very accurate answer about the type of library service available to the children who go to schools where there are no centralized school libraries. I can only tell you patterns of service. The most prevalent type is for each classroom to have a small collection of books and sometimes this collection numbers, I would say, from less than 50 volumes to maybe 200 or 300 volumes.

I think that I might be in a better position to say the types of services that these boys and girls do not have. They do not have oppor