thors of the report doubted to be large enough to warrant the establishment of a senior college. The 1959 report, however, assumed that the D.C. Teachers College would continue as the teacher training institution. Had all the high school graduates interested in an educational career been added to its 175-200 total, its basis for judgment would have been radically different. Moreover, its 175-200 estimate was based on a single criterion of college ability-an I.Q. score of 100 or more-a criterion which the Committee believes to be inadequate and misleading. Indeed, the 1959 report itself reveals that in several schools many more students attended college than had an I.Q. score of 100 or higher. The Committee believes that the I.Q. test has reliability in predicting college success chiefly when it is applied to persons familiar with the prevailing culture and generally underrates the ability of culturally deprived persons. The judgment of teachers, counselors and principals as to college ability, which the Committee requested be applied to the graduates of the District high schools in 1963 who did not go to college, led the Committee to estimate that the number of such students who would take advantage of the opportunity to attend a public college of arts and sciences, if available, was double the 175-200 students estimated by the 1959 report. C. Non-Competitive Curricula 1. The Need Scholarships in Special Both the community college and the college of arts and sciences will normally offer to students 2 years of preparatory work adequate for even specialized courses of study such as engineering and business administration. To impose upon the college of arts and sciences at the outset responsibility for offering the last 2 years of work in such courses, however, would put too great a burden all at once on that institution. Yet the Committee is unwilling to accept a situation in which qualified District students continue to be denied an opportunity to complete such specialized courses-an opportunity enjoyed by residents of any of the 50 States. Furthermore, there is a heavy demand, both nationally and in the District, for architects, engineers, economists, accountants and other professional personnel. It is in the public interest to fulfill what is at once a need of students and a demand of society. 2. The Recommendation To meet this need, the Committee recommends that a noncompetitive scholarship program be provided for students in these special areas. A student who has been accepted for admission to the junior class of an accredited college or university equipped to provide the course of study he seeks should receive a grant in such an amount as is required to enable him to attend that institution. He should have unlimited choice among local and other institutions, subject to a demonstration that his choice is appropriate to his objectives. Moreover, in the judgment of the Committee, such a scholarship program should be put into effect immediately, rather than being deferred until after the college of arts and sciences has been organized. Indeed, until it has been organized, consistency and the urgency of the need alike suggest that the scholarship program might well apply to students in all courses of study (except teacher education while the D.C. Teachers College continues to operate) to be offered in the college of arts and sciences. The Committee is firmly persuaded that permanent reliance on such a scholarship system is not a substitute for the proposed college of arts and sciences. Its reasons are stated in a later portion of this Report. It does wish to point out, however, that scholarships to be provided initially for students taking the last 2 years of their undergraduate work in special fields will relieve the new college of arts and sciences of the necessity of introducing prematurely a large number of specialized curricula. There should be no reluctance, therefore, to make the scholarship adequate in size and number. The principle that higher educational opportunities should be within economic reach of all should not be compromised by an inadequate scholarship program. The Committee is aware that in most colleges and universities tuition charges do not cover the costs of education. In the absence of special provisions, the District might thus be imposing a financial loss upon existing institutions by utilizing a scholarship program to supply its own unmet needs. The Committee suggests, therefore, that a supplementary "cost of education" grant, remitted directly to the institution attended by the student, should also be considered. Consideration should also be given to the occasional use of noncompetitive scholarships for District students working for their first professional degree or their doctorate. Some subsidies are available from various sources for work at this level, but funds to supplement present provisions for graduate fellowships when necessary would insure full opportunity for all qualified candidates. In formulating recommendations A, B and C above, the Committee has held to the conviction that residents of the District need, and should no longer be denied, the opportunity enjoyed by all other residents of the United States: that of obtaining post-high school education provided with public support. It has recognized, however, that this opportunity might be provided in several ways. In reaching its conclusion that the District should establish a new, publicly supported college of arts and sciences, it considered several alternatives. Two of them warrant brief statements. First, the Committee considered, and rejected, the possibility of providing (except temporarily) the opportunity for a college education by relying solely on individual scholarships or grants that would permit District high school graduates to attend institutions already in existence. Several considerations militate against this solution. To be effective in meeting the District's needs and placing the graduates of District high schools on a parity with high school graduates elsewhere in the United States, the scholarships would have to be available to all students accepted for admission in an accredited institution of higher educationsuch as those available to veterans under the GI bills. In no other way could scholarships or grants achieve what is needed the maximum of incentive for high school students who can profit by a college or university education. As a practical matter, however, the likelihood of continuing appropriations over the years of sums large enough to accomplish this purpose seems remote. The political uncertainty inherent in such annual appropriations would make it extremely difficult for young people to make the plans that are increasingly required to gain admission to colleges and universities of good standing. The same uncertainty would greatly complicate the problems in admissions and general administra tion of the institutions on which District students in any substantial numbers would rely for their educational needs. Moreover, a system of scholarships or grants would do nothing to resolve the urgent problem of the inadequacy of D.C. Teachers College, unless, of course, the institution were to be abolished and its students, too, were subsidized for training elsewhere. The Committee has already expressed its belief that the abolition of that institution without putting another institution in its place is unthinkable. Furthermore, such a course would deprive the District of provisions for inservice training and continuing education for professional personnel, which should be important elements in the program of the proposed college of arts and sciences. The Committee has been conscious, throughout all its deliberations, that its recommendations for meeting the needs of the Nation's Capital should be broadly applicable to other American cities as they seek to solve their own educational problems. If the Nation were now facing an era of contracting college demand, a case might conceivably be made for avoiding the creation of new institutions. Instead, we are entering an era of demand that will require unparalleled expansion of college facilities. Under these circumstances, no great city can evade its responsibility to its young people by demanding that existing private institutions absorb a great and growing number of students who perforce must look to them for educational opportunity. The appropriate response must be in terms of bricks and mortar for new basic educational facilities publicly financed at appropriate local levels. The Committee's recommendation that existing facilities and resources of specialized courses of study be utilized, at least temporarily, through a supplementary system of publicly financed, noncompetitive scholarships does no violence to this principle; complete reliance on such a scholarship system would. Second, the Committee considered, in accordance with the terms of its assignment quoted at the beginning of this report, the possibility that Howard University might itself provide the services to be performed by the comprehensive community college or the college of arts and sciences, or both. The Committee, however, rejected this possibility. It does not believe that Howard can or should be obliged to focus its attention primarily on District needs. Unless it were to move in a direction quite different from that defined both by its long tradition and its current aspirations, it could not expect to absorb a greatly increased number of students from the District. The Committee respects and approves the current efforts of Howard to contribute to the education of foreign students, particularly from the countries of southeast Asia and Africa. The attempt to impose on Howard a quite different mission-that of a university for the District of Columbia-would seriously impair Howard's capacity to discharge effectively the vital responsibilities it now carries with distinction. It is particularly important, in the Committee's judgment, that Howard should not assume the role outlined for the community college. That college, for reasons discussed below, should be independent of any 4-year college or university. Here it need only be noted that the differences in purpose and function of the two institutions make them, as experience has shown, unsuitable for combining into a single organization. D. High-Level Graduate Study and Research 1. The Need It has often been pointed out that Washington has the unhappy distinction of being one of the very few major capitals in the Western World without a truly outstanding university. Many persons who have examined the educational resources of the District have emphasized the importance of developing in the National Capital a major new program of advanced study and research. Thus, for example, a paper prepared for the U.S. Employment Service for the District of Columbia under the auspices of the Bureau of Social Science Research, Inc., on "Training for Occupational Skills in the Washington Metropolitan Area,” reaches the conclusion that "Obvious gaps in the existing educational facilities are most conspicuous at two levels: the graduate or professional school programs, and the junior college." The document continues: Limiting the discussion to the topic under consideration here skill needs of the Washington Metropolitan Area-leaves out what is perhaps the strongest argument for expansion of higher education in the Nation's Capital: the desirability of |