Page images

are not common to the ethnic group to which he belongs. Only in this fashion are we able to contribute to the development of the complete man.

Southeastern University, a small business-oriented university has been training relatively small numbers of such well-rounded persons since 1879. The student body is composed of those from all walks of life. The university is coeducational, integrated, and has a faculty composed of those who practice the subjects they teach.

Southeastern University has not obtained regional accreditation. The board of trustees decided that the community could best be served if the university could offer high-quality, low-cost education. Accordingly, the university is housed on the third floor of the central YMCA Building at 1736 G Street NW. These quarters are shared with Woodward Preparatory School which conducts classes in the same classrooms which are used by Southeastern in the evening. As a result of this management decision of the board of trustees, the university does not have the physical plant facilities to conduct full-time day school and is not accredited. The tuition rates reflect the plus side of the board's decision,

they are still fixed at $17 per credit hour.

The high quality of the education offered and the low tuition rates have attracted those who earnestly seek an education offered and the low tuition rates have attracted those who earnestly seek an education but are forced to earn a living at the same time. In this context, Southeastern University has been serving as the District of Columbia community college since 1879.

As I understand the intent of Congress, it is to provide District of Columbia residents with the opportunity to obtain high-quality, low-cost education-not to establish another governmental activity. Assuming that my understanding is correct, any educational institution (whether private or public) will need certain things to accomplish this task, as follows:

1. Land.

2. Buildings and equipment,

3. Faculty.

Since these requirements will apply equally to either public or private institutions, I urge you to consider the use of an existing private institution to accomplish your goal, namely, Southeastern University.

Southeastern University presently has a professional administrator, President John Maurer. It also has an impressive nucleus of the faculty necessary to conduct the important evening programs. The university does not have adequate physical plant. As with any new public institution, physical plant, and the land upon which to build it, must be provided. The obtaining of additional faculty for the day portion of the curriculum should provide no more problems to Southeastern than it would to a new, public institution.

It will take either Southeastern or any new public institution the same period of time to achieve full regional accreditation.

We who still believe in private enterprise do not deny that there are areas im which only the massive resources of the Federal Government are sufficient to obtain the desired result within the shortest period of time. We do, however, believe that the contribution of the Federal Government should be substantially one of assistance to individuals, rather than the creation of more public institutions which, for all practical purposes, either have no financial responsibility placed upon them, or like District of Columbia Teachers College, are abandoned and allowed to deteriorate because of the inability of those responsible to properly support the institution.

I would urge you to consider the building of an educational plant on public land, which could then be made available to Southeastern University for the conduct of an approved curriculum. Full responsibility for maintenance of the land and buildings, as well as responsibility for maintenance and replacement of all furniture and equipment would remain with the university.

A comprehensive program of tuition assistance could be used to provide all the guarantees necessary to assure a high-quality, low-cost education for all desiring it.

Please give the foregoing your most serious consideration. As you, above all others, are well aware, the pouring of more and more public funds into public educational institutions while supposedly providing high-quality education, seems to result in the deterioration of education. It spawns fine research staffs, but doesn't seem to answer the problem of educating the individual. Most of the larger institutions, both in this area and nationally, are now conducting so-called lecture classes for 200 to 300 students. We of Southeastern don't believe in that

type of education. We maintain that each student should have ready access to his instructor and that classes should be small enough to allow dialog both between professor and student and also among the students. Only in this manner is a student truly a participant in, and a contributor to, the class he is attending. Your fellow Member of the U.S. Senate, Jennings Randolph, has served the university in various capacities since 1936. Having served as an instructor and also in an administrative capacity, Senator Randolph is currently a member of the board of trustees. I feel sure that Senator Randolph would be pleased to answer any question which you would have regarding the university, its background, its contributions to the community, or its competence to undertake this most important task.

I also feel certain that both President John P. Maurer and Mr. Royal E. Jackson, president of the board of trustees would consider it a privilege and honor to testify at your subcommittee hearings.

Please have this letter read into and made a part of the official subcommittee hearings record.

Sincerely yours,



It seems to be the fad nowadays for legislators at all levels to jump on the educational bandwagon. Vast sums of money are being poured into new branches of State universities and new community colleges.

While the intent of these legislators is above question, their approaches to the problem are not. In many areas, including Washington, D.C., there are nonprofit educational institutions which for many years have served the function of the community college. Southeastern University has, since 1879, served as the community college in this area.

It would seem that many purposes could be served better by using existing institutions and know-how rather than pouring almost unlimited funds into establishing an entirely new administration and staff, housed in modern facilities to offer low-cost education to the local populace. Undoubtedly, millions of dollars could be saved each year if such an approach was taken.

We of Southeastern are exceptionally fortunate. We have professional administration which is presently capable of offering high-quality education at only $17 per credit hour. We do need modern facilities, but a new public institution would also require land and builidngs. Given governmental assistance only in the area of physical plant, the university most likely could continue to offer education at this low cost and, in addition, could also provide an unlimited curriculum.

The U.S. Congress is in the midst of discussions as to whether it should support a 2-year community college or a 4-year liberal arts college, as proposed in separate bills by Senator Wayne Morse, Democrat, of Oregon, and Senator Alan Bible, Democrat, of Nevada. These bills are scheduled to be presented to subcommittee hearings on February 23, 1966.

Any new public programs of education in the District of Columbia should be conducted through the local institutions currently chartered for that purpose by the U.S. Congress, preferably Southeastern University. New colleges and universities are not required. It is time legislators considered the effects of their actions upon existing educational institutions. Each time a new Governmentsponsored institution is created it enters into what is no more than a price war with the existing educational institutions.

It takes no special skill on the part of university administrators to offer education below cost-as long as there is a governmental group handy to provide funds for operations. I know of one instance where a public institution has agreed to conduct classes at a U.S. Army installation for $14 per credit hour, $42 per course. No person familiar with the expenses of educational institutions in this day and age would seriously categorize that arrangement as anything but below-cost education.

Now is the time for Southeasterners to rally to the cause. Contact your Congressman, your Senator, and the subcommittee. Apprise them of the facts. While the truth is sometimes more difficult to accept than attractively decorated half-truths, your legislator should be interested in the relative costs of each approach. Encourage them to investigate the possibility of supporting Southeastern University as the community college of Washington, D.C. Tell them of the successes of our graduates-we have an impressive list the alumni association will be happy to make available to one and all.



Chairman, Senate District Subcommittee of Education and Labor,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR MORSE: The 14th District Department of the American Federation of Government Employees, an association of AFGE lodges in the District of Columbia area, support the objectives of S. 293 and S. 1612. bills to authorize the establishment of a public community college and a public college of arts and sciences in the District of Columbia.

The 14th District Department endorses the intent of these bills because it feels that before community relations and job opportunities can be improved there must be a better equality of educational opportunities. The best method of helping people help themselves is through education and training.

We also suggest the beneficial effect of a community college will be maximized if professors receive the same salaries paid by the Washington area universities. The payment of comparable salaries by the community college will not only attract the better teacher, but also increases the availability of teachers because it facilitates the movement of teachers between universities. Where community colleges do pay comparable salaries, such as in California, the community colleges are successful for these reasons.

The 14th District Department of the American Federation of Government Employees also strongly recommends that the proposed community college include a department of employee-management relations. Certainly efficient, effective, and economical government requires a greater understanding of employee-management relations than is evident in the present functioning of government, if the Federal Government is to become the model employer. We appreciate the opportunity to express our views to your committee. Sincerely yours,

FRANCIS J. SPEH, President.

Arlington, Va., March 22, 1966.

Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR: As citizens of northern Virginia, we are affected by the wellbeing of the citizens of the District of Columbia, our neighbors across the Potomac.

We write to urge you to use your influence and vote in the Senate in support of legislation to provide a publicly supported 2-year community (junior) college and a 4-year college of liberal arts and sciences in the District of Columbia.

We respectfully request your support of such legislation for the following


(a) The District of Columbia and, indeed, the Nation are deprived of the contribution which could be made by the many able and talented young people in the District of Columbia who, because they are financially limited, cannot obtain a college education in private institutions.

(b) The opportunity should be afforded the youth of the District of Columbia which is provided for the citizens of the several States, where publicly supported institutions of higher learning are available at reduced cost to residents of the particular State; especially in view of the fact that the District of Columbia has more residents than seven of the States in which such publicly supported facilities are provided.

(c) Publicly supported higher education in the District of Columbia should not be limited to the education of teachers, as is currently the case, in the District of Columbia Teachers College.

(d) In Christian and humanitarian concern, we deplore the denial of educational opportunity and possibly, therefore, also of personal and vocational fulfillment, to youth who could have such opportunity through publicly supported higher education.

(e) In self-interest, we are aware that educational opportunity for the citizens of the District of Columbia will, by the benefits it brings to the District, indirectly benefits also the suburban areas which surround it.

For these reasons, the Session of the Church of the Covenant, United Presbyterian, U.S.A., the elected representatives of the 340 members of this congregation, meeting on March 20, 1966, urge you to support the legislation referred to above.

Sincerely yours,

H. BARRY KEEN, Moderator.
JOSEPH A. Sizoo, Clerk of Session.

Hyattsville, Md., March 23, 1966.


Chairman, Senate District Subcommittee on Education and Labor, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR MORSE: As a neighbor of Washington, D.C., I express my strong enthusiasm for a 4-year liberal arts college and a 2-year community college in the District. I believe that this would be a great blessing to the young people of Washington in particular and to everyone in the District and the Greater Washington area in general. I sincerely hope that you will be successful in passing the necessary legislation to establish these two colleges.

May the Lord bless you as you carry out your very important work.
Sincerely yours,

JAMES L. EWALT, Minister.

U.S. Senate,

Washington, D.C.

Washington, D.C., March 26, 1966.

DEAR MR. MORSE: We hope you will consider Southeast Washington as a site for a college.

It would eliminate much of the competition that the other college may be concerned about.

More of the skilled working people could benefit from our fast growing Congress Heights-Washington Highland area if the college site was near the Bolling Field base.

The disadvantage of placing the college elsewhere is that the low-income people of the largest area of Washington in Southeast will not attend.

With kindest regards,

Truly yours,


Acting President.


March 24, 1966.

Re Community College.

Washington, D.C.

DEAR SIR: About 35 years ago I wrote to District Commissioner Luther H. Reichelderfer that the graduates of the high schools here should have scholarships provided for them since they did not have a college to attend like in the States. He referred the letter to Mr. Ballou, who was Superintendent of Schools. Mr. Ballou wrote me that the high school students here were quite well provided for, since many colleges throughout the country offered scholarships.

Many States-21 States on January 1, 1965-had less bank deposits than the District of Columbia, yet each one of these same States has from one large State University to several State colleges. Some of these States provided a State university for their students when two-thirds of the inhabitants of the State were living in log houses, and drawing water from their wells or fetching the water from their spring.

It seems to me that it would be a good idea to find out why the civic authorities here the District Commissioners, the Board of Education, and the board of trade allowed the two Teachers Colleges to fizzle out. Over their many decades they should have grown into a very capable, as well as highly creditable, institu

tion of collegiate rank and would have, had they been in Atlanta, Chicago, Los Angeles, or Portland.

You stated each State has an individual need for some special study. One here in Washington is library science and training, since there are so many large libraries here in Washington.

And, too, in establishing the new liberal arts college, ample funds should be provided to give the new college a large library at the beginning.

As to the site, on general principles, it should be remembered at all times that the Founding Fathers established Washington as the seat of the Federal Government, and not as the site of the Federal poorhouse. The future needs of the Government must be foremost in all planning. A new Archives Building is sorely needed. A city college-a national graduate institution-is sorely needed. A new Agricultural Department Building, a new Patent Office, a new Government Printing Office.

Digressing a bit. In regard to the national graduate institution, all of the facilities for graduate studies now on the campuses at Harvard, at Massachusetts Tech, at Yale, at Columbia, at Cornell, at Princeton, at Chicago, at Michigan, at Berkeley, and at Rice-all combined-do not equal the facilities for graduate study that are now virtually idle here around the Mall in the Nation's Capital. It seems to me a national graduate institution should be made a branch of the Smithsonian Institution. This would give it worldwide prestige the very first year. However, this is not what you are discussing at present.

I think the boys and girls graduating from high school here in Washington need better parents.

Yours truly,



COLLEGE HEIGHTS ESTATE, Hyattsville, Md., March 19, 1966.

Chairman, Senate Subcommittee on Education and Labor,
Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I wish to register approval for your bill to provide a 4-year college and a 2-year community college for the District of Columbia. Surely, residents of the District should have these educational opportunities without the high cost of private colleges, as do the residents of the States. Sincerely,

Mrs. W. Keith Custis.

WASHINGTON, D.C., March 24, 1966.

Subject: S. 293, District of Columbia colleges.


U.S. Senator,

Old Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR MORSE: It is my understanding that you have invited suggestions as to the method of choosing the new Board of Higher Education which will take jurisdiction over the creation and operation of the new District of Columbia Public Community College and College of Liberal Arts and Sciences. This is a subject which has received a great deal of attention and study from concerned citizens over the last 2 years.

In a nutshell, the consensus now seems to me to be, that the Board should be composed of nine members (five residents of the District of Columbia) appointed for 3-year staggered terms so that the terms of three members expire each year; the Board to be chosen as follows: three members appointed by the President of the United States; three by the Board of Commissioners of the District of Columbia; and three members appointed by the alumni of the new College of Liberal Arts and Sciences and its predecessor and predecessors (i.e., the District of Columbia Teachers College, Wilson Teachers College, and Miner Teachers College at the outset).

The importance of alumni representation and participation has been stressed by many local citizens who have served on the boards of well-known colleges and universities. We have distinguished graduates of the teachers college to choose from at the outset, and we can expect many more as the years go by and

« PreviousContinue »