Page images

A public community college located close to the students' homes will make access to higher education readily available and relatively inexpensive. The proposed college would recognize the value of the liberal arts and other general education courses in the overall educational development of young people. The general educational curriculum of the college would provide courses in English, history, mathematics, science, psychology, economics, and the fine arts for those who choose to major in one of the business or technical education curriculums.

It is estimated that the community college physical plant for 2,500 students would cost from $6 to $7 million. Equipment would cost approximately $900,000. This does not include the cost of a suitable site. The operating budget of the college would amount to about $3,750,000 per year or $1,500 per student. The first year of operation with an estimated 1,400 students would call for a budget of approximately $2,250,000.

Senator MORSE. May I interrupt you again to ask and have the hearing record show that although the chairman of the subcommittee is openminded as to physical facilities, I would not want the administration to think that I had forgotten about my previous suggestion that a good long look needs to be taken at the facilities at the Bureau of Standards that are shortly to be vacated in the not-too-distant future. I do not know to what extent they might be suitable, but I am not so sure that they could not be made and put to good use in connection with a college. You have a lot of facilities already built by way of laboratories. I have been advised by people that know more about physical plant than I do that it could be used for the vocational training features of a college. I do hope the administration will take a long, hard look on the possibility of making this area, which is well located, I am also advised, as a potential site. But I do not propose to argue the matter of site. I am perfectly willing to put the college anywhere in order to get started. But on the other hand, we are going to be confronted with some problems of expense, and I want to save money wherever we can and at the same time provide good facilities for the students.

But I think it is important to get the college started, and I do hope that there will not be any final disposal of the Bureau of Standards location until there has been adequate time to consider the other possible locations for such a college.

Reverend HEWLETT. Sir, I appreciate that, and I would only say that on the basis of the statement you have made previously that we look upon education as being an investment, we do not hesitate to mention the figures here, and these are model figures that we have in mind.

The President's Committee also attempted to obtain reliable data on the need for a 4-year college of arts and sciences in terms of the number of District high school graduates who have the ability but lack the opportunity to attend such an institution. The members of this Committee, after a careful analysis of existing studies on this subject and of their own studies, concluded that the college of arts and sciences could be expected even at the outset to meet the need and desire for higher education of at least 600 District secondary school graduates each year who are college-able but who can afford to con

tinue in school only in a publicly supported institution. There are other factors which in the judgment of the Committee would further increase the enrollment in a college of this type. The study just completed by the Superintendent and his staff tends to support the findings of the President's Committee. We must agree with the Committee that denials of opportunity for a college education for this large number of the youth of the District of Columbia must not be allowed to continue.

The Committee stated that the establishment of a college of arts and sciences in the District of Columbia under public control would be in response to two urgent needs. First, the District should have a completely new physical and educational setting for the vital function of teacher education. And second, the young people of the District should have the opportunity now enjoyed by the young people of all of the States to attend a publicly supported institution offering a liberal arts education at least through the baccalaureate degree.

Each of the 50 States provides for its youth and adults at least one public institution of higher education of broad character and most of them have several such colleges or universities along with many privately supported institutions. The 11 smallest States, each with a population smaller than that of the District of Columbia, provide an average of three public colleges which grant the bachelor's and in most cases graduate degrees. The District of Columbia with the highest per capita income of any of the States has only one college under public control, and this college is limited to teacher education.

And, Senator, if I might bring up to date a question you were asking a while ago, I would quote statistics from the July 1965 issue of Survey of Current Business, monthly magazine of the Office of Business Economics, U.S. Department of Commerce. It lists the District of Columbia, with $3,544, as No. 1 in per capita income among the States in the Union, and it ranks Delaware No. 2, with $3,460 per capita income per year.

Senator MORSE. I want to read for emphasis, Reverend Hewlett, what I think is a very important sentence in this statement you make this morning that you just read.

The 11 smallest States, each with a population smaller than of the District of Columbia, provide an average of three colleges which grant the bachelor's and in most cases graduate degrees.

Now, that sentence is a very important sentence for us to keep in mind when we consider other problems involving the District of Columbia, such as representation, such as the right to vote, such as the right to govern themselves, and don't forget that these small States with a population less than the District of Columbia have two U.S. Senators, they have Representatives in the House of Representatives, their cities govern themselves, and you just cannot separate the problem that we have this morning from this overall problem that confronts the District of Columbia in regard to the basic rights of the citizens of the District who would be what you have heard me say so many times, guaranteed their rights of first-class citizenship. You are going to have a second-class educational opportunity to the young men and women that fall in these economic groups that we have been talking about here this morning until we start recognizing the basic right of the population here to have these privileges of first-class citizenship that we are talking about.

I find it very difficult to understand how sincere and well-intentioned people and they are sincere and well-intentioned-do not want to give support to the programs that you and I and others have fought for these many years to give full citizenship benefits to the people in this District. I am at a loss to understand how they hold that point of view with such vital statistics as you have embedded in that sentence. That sentence tells the story, and no one would fight harder to see to it that the people in those 11 States enjoy all the benefits, too, that I think Americans should be allowed. I am always at a loss to understand why they should be denied to the people here. And so I wanted to stress that, because I think it bears on what our problem is. Reverend HEWLETT. Thank you, sir.

It is very obvious that the young people of the District do not have an equal opportunity for higher education enjoyed by those in the various States when it comes to the availability of publicly supported colleges and universities. Many capable and deserving youth in the District of Columbia are denied the opportunity for the fullest development of their intellectual capacities because of conditions beyond their immediate control. Tuition charges in local institutions, except Howard University, are beyond the means of a large number of high school graduates. The President's Committee reported that 1,837 of the graduates of the public high schools entered local universities from 1960 to 1963, and that 60 percent of this number went to Howard where tuition charges are lower.

It is of interest to note that in the State universities and land-grant colleges the out-of-State tuition this year is up 19.9 percent from a median of $612 to $734. Median room costs rose 5.1 percent and median board costs rose 2.3 percent. Last year only nine State institutions charged nonresidents $900 or more, and of these only four charged more than $1,000. This year there are 20 State institutions with out-of-State tuition exceeding $900 and seven of these are now charging more than $1,000. Out-of-State tuition was raised this year at 59 institutions. The trend in cost of higher education in publicly supported institutions is upward. Private institutions have been forced to increase tuition and fee charges during the past several years in greater amounts than have the public colleges. For many students these charges are prohibitive.

It is evident that the increased costs of attending State and private institutions are and will continue to be a problem for high school graduates in the District of Columbia who may desire to attend these institutions. Both the increased costs and the problem of obtaining admission to out-of-State institutions that are becoming more and more overcrowded have a direct bearing on the need for the District to face up to its responsibilities in the education of its own residents. The Honorable Congressman Carlton Sickles recently told a group of educators:

Last year 100,000 extremely able high school graduates failed to go to college largely because of financial reasons.

The per capita expenditure of higher education in the District of Columbia is $1.22 (exclusive of the two laboratory schools, the cost of which should logically be charged against elementary education). Mr. Chairman, may I say this figure differs from one that was quoted earlier, because I have indicated the reason here. The figure quoted

earlier included the per capita expenditure for the two laboratory schools as well as teachers college. When we take the two laboratory schools out, which are properly the responsibility of public education, elementary education, it leaves the per capita expenditure for higher education in the District of Columbia at $1.22, compared with the $21.23 spent in our neighboring State of Maryland, and the $19.40 spent in our neighboring State of Virginia. The average national per capita expenditure is $28.87.

All of the States are and have been for years spending considerable sums in capital outlays to expand higher education. Our present college buildings (formerly Miner and Wilson Teachers Colleges) were built more than 35 years ago. Since that time the District has not spent a penny on capital outlay except the normal maintenance expenses on these two buildings. In comparison, during 1963-64 Virginia and Maryland spent more than $20 million and $16 million respectively.

Our present plight does not allow us to make application for funds under title VII of the Higher Education Act of 1965, which doubled grants from $230 million to $460 million for undergraduate facilities this year.

The estimated cost of a new building or buildings for the college of arts and sciences would be from $10 million to $11 million for a student body of 2,000 undergraduate students and for about 500 graduate and in-service teachers. It is not likely that more than 2,000 students would be on the campus at any one time. This does not include the cost of a site. The cost of furnishings and equipment would amount to another $900,000.

The annual operating cost of the college is estimated to be $3 million for the first year, increasing some each year until it reaches a maximum of $4,500,000 by the opening of the fourth or fifth year. This will cover both day and evening undergraduate and graduate


In my testimony today I have attempted to emphasize the evidence which has convinced the members of the Board of Education that the conclusions of the President's Committee on Higher Education in the District of Columbia are inescapable. The need for the establishment of a public community college and a public 4-year college of arts and sciences is urgent. I shall leave it to others to testify about the types of curriculums and programs of study that should be provided in these colleges. The plea of the Board of Education is that you act and act immediately to provide for the establishment of these two colleges and provide the youth of the District of Columbia with the same opportunities for postsecondary school education that have been provided for the youth of the 50 States of the United States of America for

many years.

Although you know, sir, the need is great in the District of Columbia for public higher education, I cannot refrain from attempting to share with you the profound concern of the Board of Education for immediate legislation that would give to the youth of this city their birthright-public higher education.

Thank you kindly, sir.

Senator MORSE. That is a very fine statement, Reverend Hewlett. On behalf of the committee I want to thank you very much. I do not have any questions.

Dr. Hansen?

Dr. HANSEN. I am not making a statement this morning. Dr. Carr is making a statement.

Senator MORSE. Dr. Carr, I will be pleased to hear you now.

But, Dr. Hansen, it will be helpful to this committee-I know you will follow our hearing anyway-if from time to time you will supply a memorandum to the committee that you would like to have me put in the hearing record, commenting upon the statements and evidence that is put in the record by others. Without calling you back constantly, I would like to have you from time to time file a memorandum with the committee, made available to any witness that has an opposite point of view, and then we will call you back for a final bit of testimony where you can summarize your point of view in regard to the full record.

Dr. HANSEN. I appreciate that very much. May I say one thing this morning, that as we build in the direction of a community college and a 4-year program, let us keep in mind that the teachers college is performing an admirable function now. It has a staff of great competence, the student body is among the finest, I think, in the city, and it is an effective institution. So I should like to make that one point for the record that we build on the strength and expand the program and understanding that we have to keep this institution going in one form or the other, no matter what the destiny of this bill is, so that we do have a growing, dynamic kind of institution in the existing organization of the teachers college.

Senator MORSE. Let there be no room for doubt as to the chairman's position about the teachers college. As Dr. Carr knows, I think that the teachers college and its staff and its president deserve the gratitude of this entire community. It is certainly not contemplated that the teachers college will in any way be eliminated, but will be strengthened and perform a vital part of the new college that is contemplated under this bill. I would consider it to be the department of education of the new college, as we refer to departments of education in other institutions.

I am sure that Dr. Carr will be the first to admit that the school has not received the support that members of this committee think it should have received and I am sure that he knows it deserves to have received, and I think that the best way to strengthen the teachers college is to go ahead and make it an integral part of the new college we contemplate by these bills.

Dr. Carr, I will be delighted to hear you.


Dr. CARR. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate very much the opportunity to testify in support of the two new colleges as proposed by the President's Committee on Public Higher Education. Both the community college and the college of arts and sciences are needed in the District of Columbia, and in my testimony this morning I shall attempt to avoid, to the extent possible, repeating what the other witnesses have said or emphasized.

That is a rather difficult thing, I know, because so many fine and persuasive things have already been said, but I see no need to continue

« PreviousContinue »