Dr. FARNER. Yes, we agree. That is the reason we want this total spread of the application group. Mr. HARSHA. Well, I appreciate your explanation, and I certainly feel much relieved. Mr. HORSKY. Let me add only one thing that is perhaps implicit in what Dr. Farner has said but has not been made explicit. We do not anticipate allowing this to happen again. This was a gross misjudgment of the need for this school in this District, and our freshmen class next year will be adequately budgeted to take care of all applicants. Dr. FARNER. When I first arrived, I raised the estimate from very low figures up to the 1300. There has been a massive underestimate, I think, over the years that the need for the two colleges has been studied of the potential student demand, and now we are really sort of proving that point in a sense. Mr. SISK. All right. Did you have any further questions? Mr. HARSHA. No. Mr. SISK. Well, gentlemen, we appreciate very much your coming before the Committee this morning and your fine statement. I might say that so far as I know this concludes your testimony. However, I would hope, Dr. Farner, that you and Dr. Wiegman, and Mr. Horsky as far as that goes, would be prepared, maybe, to answer some questions. As I say, not all members of the subcommittee were here this morning. I might say, on the statement which has now been made a part of the record, of Dr. Farner and Dr. Wiegman submitted on pages three, four, five and six, I think they do set forth a very eloquent plea and a very good reason for making of this school and land-grant college. And, of course, we have precedents in all the states as we provided in the Hawaiian Act which has been mentioned, of course, the cash in lieu of land, but if there are further questions, why you gentlemen will be here in the city and available in the future if you are needed. Mr. HORSKY. We will be available. Mr. SISK. Yes, Dr. Wiegman. Dr. WIEGMAN. Mr. Chairman, one final comment. We view the timing of this legislation as very important because now is the time to begin recruiting faculty and extension workers to help carry out the intent of this legislation. So any particular movement on this would be very much appreciated. Mr. SISK. Well, I think it is understood that there was come urgency, at least you people felt that, and let me say this, that the Committee will hope to move along as expeditiously as possible. I think what we will probably try to do this morning, if possible, is to finish the testimony on it and then as soon as possible, the Committee will go into Executive Session and attempt to write up the bill or any changes, and I do not understand at least at the present time there has been any proposed amendments, but at least try to get the bill reported to the full Committee as soon as we can properly proceed. Thank you gentlemen. Mr. HORSKY. Thank you. Dr. FARNER. Thank you. Mr. SISK. The complete statement of Dr. Farner and Dr. Wiegman will be included in the record at this point. (The statement referred to follows:) STATEMENT OF DR. FRANK FARMER, PRESIDENT, FEDERAL CITY COLLEGE AND DR. EUGENE WIEGMAN, DIRECTOR OF EXTENSION, FEDERAL CITY COLLEGE Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for inviting Dr. Eugene Wiegman and me to testify regarding the bills, HR 15280 and S. 1999, to "Amend the District of Columbia Education Act", the authorization to provide the District of Columbia with its own land grant institution. We wish also to thank this Committee for the wisdom it has shown in recommending the passage of PL 89-791, the law which created the Federal City College and the Washington Technical Institute. We are, at long last, able to provide the citizens of the District with public higher education so that they may better meet their own expectations and qualify for positions through which they can contribute more fully as citizens of this city and nation. The Federal City College plans to open its doors to 2400 students this September, staffed by a faculty of 100, a student service staff of 53, and a small administrative staff. The college will be temporarily housed in the old Securities Exchange Commission Building at Second and "D" Streets, N.W., just a few blocks from here. The Washington Technical Institute is now housed at the old Bureau of Standards Building on Connecticut Avenue, N.W. The reception of these two institutions by the community; students, citizens, Commissioner Washington, the City Council and Congress is gratifying. We know we are needed and we will do our utmost to fulfill the great responsibility which we have assumed. PL89-791 states that the Federal City College is authorized by the Congress to offer a four year program in liberal arts and sciences acceptable toward a bachelor of arts degree, including courses in teacher education; a two-year program (i) which is acceptable for full credit toward a bachelor's degree or for a degree of associate in arts, and which may include courses in business education, secretarial training, and business administration, or (ii) in engineering, mathematics or the physical and biological sciences which is designed to prepare a student to work as a technician or at a semiprofessional level in engineering, sciences, or other technical fields which require the understanding and application of basic engineering, scientific, or mathematical principles or knowledge; eudeational programs of study as may be acceptable for a master's degree; and courses on an individual, noncredit basis to those desiring to further their education without seeking a degree. The Washington Technical Institute is authorized to offer programs in vocational and technical education designed to fit individuals for useful employment in recognized occupations; and vocational and technical courses on an individual, noncredit basis. WHY A LAND GRANT COLLEGE IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA? The enabling legislation establishing the Federal City College and the Washington Technical Institute is broad in scope, but land grant college status for the Federal City College is needed for three important reasons: 1. Land grant college status would, through the Morrill Act and the BankheadJones Act, provide the funds necessary to broaden the curriculum so that the Federal City College could offer expanded and strengthened programs of urban extension courses. For example, programs of study could be offered in environmental science, dietetics, child care, home economics, horticulture and youth development to name a few. Programs of study already established could be broadened to offer additional course work in physical sciences to train, at least on the two year level, young people interested in careers in agriculture, horticulture, and forestry in cooperation with the National Arboretum. Land grant college status would permit an expansion of curriculum offerings in mathematics and engineering. 2. Land grant college status would provide the necessary funds to extend the college into the community in many of the same ways that land grant colleges are serving in your respective States. The Federal City College would be a center for the use of citizens, community organizations and Government. It would be the catalyst for discussions between specialists and lay citizens of community problems to help plan for further development of the city. Noncredit course, seminars, and workshops for interested citizens to help them upgrade their skills and knowledges would be offered by the college. The Federal City College, as the land grant college, would reach out to the citizens of the District with family centered programs to assist homemakers with management skills, good housekeeping practices, buymanship, care and use of foods, clothing, household furnishing and equipment, child development and human relations. Programs would also assist husbands and youth in learning experiences in such areas as recreation, personal and public health and community services. The Federal City College would replicate some of the successful 4-H youth development and summer camp programs that are now functioning in such cities as Rochester, Buffalo and Syracuse, New York; Indianapolis, Terre Haute and Gary, Indiana; New Haven, Connecticut; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Cleveland, Cincinnati and Canton, Ohio; Minneapolis, Minnesota; Los Angeles and San Francisco, California; El Paso, Texas, and Tucson and Phoenix, Arizona. Extension agents and their aides cooperating with the college would carry these programs to the family and to the neighborhood. We see, under land grant college status, the possibility of setting up several extension centers in the District to better service citizens and cooperate with the Government of the District in implementing public service programs. 3. Finally, land grant college status for the District would grant equality to the citizens of the District. The 50 States and Puerto Rico having land grant college status perform certain types of services for citizens in their States which govern land grant colleges. The population of the District of Columbia is larger than eleven States of the Union and the District is facing many of the same problems that land grant colleges are tackling. Land grant college status would allow the Federal City College to call freely upon the services and knowledges of other land grant colleges and to share achievements. Also land grant college status would bring a measure of prestige to the Federal City College. We have been informed that the land grant colleges of the 50 States wish us well. MEMORANDUM OF PARTICIPATION WITH OTHER INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING Our sister institution, the Washington Technical Institute would benefit also by having the Federal City College named the land grant college. The Federal City College would enter into a Memorandum of Participation with the Washington Technical Institute, under which the Washington Technical Institute would assume certain academic instruction and extension services in vocational and technical education. This would assure minimum duplication of instruction at the two public institutions. The Washington Technical Institute would be involved heavily in instruction in engineering and the mechanical arts. Other institutions could also be asked to participate in programs in which they have special strengths to contribute. In conclusion, it is our belief that the Federal City College is suited for the task at hand. Land grant colleges, such as the Federal City College will become upon passage of these bills, were established to serve all the people, not just the privileged few who could afford an education. We like to think of ourselves as the College without walls-a place to provide education of excellence within, not shut away from, the city. We see the city as our campus, and the passage of HR 15280 and S. 1999 will make this vision a reality. Thank you. Mr. HARSHA. One of these bills passed the other body, Mr. Chairman? Mr. SISK. Yes, the bill, S. 1999, has passed the other body. Mr. HARSHA. And is it in the same form as we have it? Mr. SISK. Identical, as it passed. It was different as originally introduced there. We have from the Department of Agriculture, Federal Extension Service, I believe, this morning, Dr. Lloyd H. Davis, Administrator, and Dr. Ralston, Deputy Administrator. Dr. RALSTON. My name is Ralston. Mr. SISK. All right, Dr. Ralston. Dr. Davis is not with you? Mr. SISK. Very well, Dr. Ralston, do you have a prepared statement? If so, it will be made a part of the record and you can read it or proceed as you see fit. STATEMENT OF DR. N. P. RALSTON, DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR, FEDERAL EXTENSION SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Dr. RALSTON. Thank you, very much, sir. I would like to present the written statement for the record and very briefly summarize what we have in the statement, and then if there are questions I will be pleased to attempt to answer those. I might say that the Department of Agriculture fully supports this amendment to the District of Columbia Public Education Act establishing the Federal City College and land-grant institution of higher learning. Two parts of that amendment are of concern and interest to the Department of Agriculture because we have jurisdiction over two of these parts, namely, the Smith-Lever Act which authorizes the work by the cooperative extension service; and secondly, the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1967 which does not have nearly the scope and direction that the Smith-Lever Act does have to this particular piece of legislation. I want merely to say that Secretary Freeman in a recent address at Fairleigh Dickinson University stated I think rather clearly and succinctly his position, to quote: Research and education are not enough. The city system should include an urban extension service, made up of trained men and women, who, like the county agent, carry the results of applied research to its actual users--the people who need help. The extension agents would serve in another major fashion. They would report the needs of the people back to local governments and to universities for research and action. I think this is an extremely important relationship that we build between the people of an area and the university that is serving those people so that we have a good strong communications so they reflect their feelings back and forth, and I think provide much greater service for the people which the university is serving. The Smith-Lever Act, I think, you are familiar with. If there are questions on the Agricultural Marketing Act, I will be happy to answer questions on that. I think Congressman Zwach indicated some of the scope of the cooperative extension work in some of the other urban areas of the country. Very frankly, we are just sort of scratching the surface. These are really developmental efforts in many of these cities that we are doing. but we are finding that the techniques and methods that we have used for many years can be adapted and are working in the real hard-core areas of America, of course urban cities, and we think it is a useful technique for helping these people move ahead. Now just a word about the cooperating university. I have already indicated that the university area needs to be very close to its people, and we think the Extension Service would be one way of helping to bridge this gap. We believe that the fact that the staff of the university, good staff of the university would lend a great deal of prestige to helping the people advance in the community. We could cite many instances where a professional person from a university has gone into a community and worked with a young person or a family and this becomes really important to them and helps them move ahead. And so we would see that as an important aspect. I would say, also, the fact that the Federal City College would become a land-grant university under this Act would provide an entree for them to associate more freely, and I say on a better basis with all the other land-grant institutions throughout the country. Conferences, programs seminars, and these kinds of things, of course, they would be heavily involved in, and I think this would help build the Federal City College as a university perhaps faster than it might otherwise. So, I think there is a lot to be said for that kind of relationship. I do not know that I need to spend very much time on what the Extension Service can do for the families in the District. I think this has been discussed from time to time. You have seen written testimony in other hearings in regard to this. But I again would just restate and say that we have enough experience-well, I would qualify that, not enough. We are learning. We will never have enough experience, but we are learning more and more how to be more effective in raising the levels and hopes and aspirations of people who have been bypassed and get them into the mainstream of our society and make them more productive. And I think that is basically what our Extension Service is concerned with in working with people. The next several pages merely indicate some of the precise kinds of programs that we would be using in working with the Federal City College. The methodology that we have used I think will continue to improve. We have had some discussion with Federal City College. And over on page 14 we indicate that we would probably work with them like we do with all other land-grant universities in developing a memorandum of understanding which would rather clearly set forth the working relationships between the administration of that institution and the Department of Agriculture clearly spelling out responsibilities of each in carrying out the program. And as Dr. Wiegman indicated, the program is developed jointly so that we are completely planning and negotiating and continually working at changing programs ad trying those which will be more effective, dropping those which are not, and this kind of thing as we move ahead. Now, as to the cost of the program, I think, as you are aware, the bill merely states that the sums to be appropriated shall not be in substitution of what now is already being appropriated for the SmithLever Act but in addition, and that four persons of that would go to the Department for carrying out its administrative, technical and other services of the Department and the District of Columbia would not be required to offset allotments under this section, and this differs very much from all other universities that we are cooperating with under the Smith-Lever Act. All other universities written in the original Smith-Lever Act, as you know, requires offsetting funds in an equal amount. So in this particular bill provision is provided for total funds to be provided to the university to carry out this function of SmithLever Act. Mr. HARSHA. Could I interrupt at this point? Mr. SISK. Yes. Mr. HARSHA. What is the reason for that, sir? |