If the community college does not provide opportunities for these individuals to prepare themselves for positions of a managerial, technical, or semiprofessional type, there is little excuse for its existence. Few people with a background of information in the field of higher education would ever attempt to justify the existence of a public community college just to provide the first 2 years of general education to prepare a student for transfer to a 4-year college or university.

Transfer curriculums would be available, but the point I am emphasizing here is that the community college would give great emphasis to occupational curriculums and that is a great need in the District as well as elsewhere.

Certainly, the curriculums of the community college would be geared to meet the needs of our local community, and I am confident that through them the economic improvement of many young people in the District now untrained for productive years would be greatly improved.

Also, we should keep in mind, I think, that there should be a balance between specialized information and basic principles in a junior college or a community college curriculum. Such a balance in the curriculums would give students the capability of acquiring other skills with a minimum of reeducation as machines and processes become obsolete. Also students enrolled in the occupational education curriculums would have work in the basic academic disciplines to the fullest extent of their capacity to profit from this work.

In these days of rapid obsolescence of many specific kinds of skills, education should be as basic and generic as possible.

Another advantage of the community college is the close relationship to the public schools. As has already been mentioned here this morning that the hope of a college to which these young men and women might go following high school graduation would be a great incentive in keeping them in the secondary schools.

I think that this hope of continuing education in the college is a strong factor in favor of a junior college in the District.

The success of a community college is measured in terms of its responsiveness to local needs. Thus the doors of the college would be open to adults, as well as to high school graduates, who need to improve their skills or to retrain themselves for changing job specifications or for new employment opportunities.

Similarly, others who desire to remedy their educational deficiencies or to enrich their lives culturally would be encouraged to take advantage of the opportunities offered in their community college. Undoubtedly an adult program would constitute a very vital function of this college.

Then, Mr. Chairman, on page 4 I mentioned the need for skilled and semiskilled workers which I doubt because of the limitation of time if I need to read it.

The important point here is that there is an increasing demand for young men and women who have developed skills and many of these skills can be best developed on the junior college level, and unless you think that this part should be read, I will go on.

Senator MORSE. I think not, it is already in the hearing record.

Dr. CARR. The important thing is, as I mentioned at the bottom of the page, that these skills must be developed through educational

institutions.

And the junior college here can make its great

contribution. Then the major curriculums that would be in our judgment emphasized would be those on general education; business education, and technical education, organized in 2 years that would end with the associate in arts degree.

Now, turning to the college of liberal arts and sciences. All surveys of high school seniors indicate that there are a substantial number of students who graduate from the high schools in the District who are able to profit by a 4-year general college education but who cannot do so because of cost. They deserve an opportunity for a college education equal to that available to high school students throughout the United States.

Public higher education on the degree granting level must no longer be limited to teacher education in the District of Columbia. This is undemocratic and indefensible.

I have been asked at times what would be the goals, in my judgment, of a 4-year college of arts and sciences, and my only answer is this, that it would be those of any good liberal arts college.

The college would be organized and administered to serve the people of Washington. However, I do think that the major responsibility of the college for the foreseeable future would be to prepare teachers.

The program, while including teacher education, would not be limited to this area of preparation as is that of the Teachers College. Students with no interest in teacher preparation would be able to complete majors in acadamic areas of study.

The extent of the offerings would depend, of course, on the resources of the college.

As far as the admission standards are concerned they would differ substantially from those of the community college. They would follow the admission standards found in most liberal arts colleges throughout the country.

The privilege of transferring from the community college to the college of arts and sciences would be available to students who can qualify for this transfer.

It is estimated, however, as has already been brought out, that the student body would soon reach 2,000 undergraduate students and perhaps 500 or more on the graduate level if the Board of Education should establish the graduate program.

As far as the curriculums are concerned, at the outset the college of arts and sciences would concentrate on offering a strong core of basic liberal studies: in the sciences: physics, chemistry, biology; in mathematics; in the social sciences-history, geography, economics, sociology, Government; in the humanities-English, foreign languages, literature, speech; and in the fine arts-art, music, drama.

We are aware that the objectives of a liberal arts college differ from those of a teachers college and that careful thought must be given to this aspect of the new institution. As the District of Columbia Teachers College program provides for a strong base of liberal studies, and is so recognized by the regional accrediting association, orientation of the faculty to a liberal arts program would not be difficult.

It has not proved to be a difficult step in the past for single purpose teachers colleges to move into a multipurpose program. With curriculums which emphasize liberal studies, with strong subject matter

and professional division, and with a faculty well prepared in subject matter and in professional education, the base of a multipurpose institution of higher education, as authorized in S. 293 already exists in the District of Columbia Teachers College.

And, Mr. Chairman, I emphasize that for the simple reason that there may be some who will say that it is a very big undertaking to attempt to organize a college at this time from ground up and that it would almost be beyond the capacity of the District of Columbia to do that.

What I am saying here is that the basis for the 4-year liberal arts college already exists; the fact is, I think this would be an easier transition than to establish a junior college with the occupational curriculums. Both can be done.

Senator MORSE. I quite agree with you, and furthermore, we have just been locating these new colleges from the surface of the ground on up all over the country where they do not have the foundation to build on what you have here in the form of the teacher's college.

I think it is a much easier task here than in the other places where they have started from scratch.

Dr. CARR. Thank you.

The faculty, the library, the subject matter offered is already very commendable. There is one thing we do need, and that very badly, and that is a new plant in order that we can manage the type program that is envisaged in the President's Committee Report and in S. 293.

I would like to mention, however, that the time has come when the need for a new physical plant is imperative for the District of Columbia Teachers College, if it is to continue to function as an institution of higher education.

The present buildings are obsolete and worn out. Would it not make sense to build a new college of arts and sciences which would include a program of teacher education instead of building another single purpose teachers college? The answer is obvious.

States and municipalities are no longer provincial, but maintain a relationship in the ends they seek to higher education. Modern mobility is such that an architect educated in Oregon may serve the people of Kentucky or a scientist educated in Virginia may use his scientific knowledge in Colorado.

Individuals educated in any part of the country may serve in some other area or even in another land. Thus, every State has the responsibility to provide diversified education for its citizens so that not only the Nation but the world may benefit from their education. And the District must share in this responsibility through its system of public higher education.

The States over the years have found no substitute for publicly supported higher education for their citizens and neither can the District of Columbia.

Both public and private institutions are needed in our complex civilization. Each has and will continue to make a distinct contribution in services to youth and adults. It is, I believe, an accepted fact that a democartic system of higher education need not accord all students the privilege of attending the same kinds of institutions any more than it need permit all to pursue the same curriculum.

The important thing is that equal opportunity is accorded to every

American to attain the highest level of education of which he is capable.

Education is the most profitable investment society can make and the richest reward it can confer.

In conclusion, a community college and a college of liberal arts and sciences, under public sponsorship, would greatly expand educational opportunities for the residents of the District of Columbia.

The accelerating expansion of knowledge, the growing complexity of our society, and the rapid advances in technology call for persons with high levels of educational preparation.

Individuals must be prepared to meet the problems of the community in which they live and of the world which they will inherit and help to shape. We cannot wait until tomorrow to educate for tomorrow's needs.

Already the District of Columbia has waited too long to expand its publicly supported higher education. It is imperative that the city and the Congress provide resources at once to carry out the recommendations of the President's Committee on Public Higher Education in the District of Columbia.

Otherwise, higher education opportunities will remain considerably limited for many individuals in this community, especially for those who come from low-income families.

Colleges planned to meet the needs of the youth and adults of the District would be a powerful factor in helping thousands of individuals realize their full potential.

Mr. Chairman, I urge the favorable action of this committee on S. 293 without delay.

(Resolution previously referred to follows:)

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA TEACHERS COLLEGE,
Washington, D.C., January 11, 1966.

Memorandum to: Dr. Paul O. Carr.
From: Executive committee, District of Columbia Teachers College Faculty
Organization.
Re endorsement of S. 293.

The executive committee of the District of Columbia Teachers College Faculty Organization, recognizing the great need for public-supported higher education in the District of Columbia and noting the faculty's unanimous vote on January 5, 1966, endorsing the idea of public-supported higher education in the District of Columbia, hereby endorses bill S. 293 which was introduced January 6, 1965, by Senator Morse to authorize the establishment of a public community college and a public college of arts and sciences in the District of Columbia.

Very truly yours,

Mrs. BARBARA K. STATHIS, Chairman.

Mrs. ESTELLE C. EPSTEIN, Vice Chairman.
Mrs. GUINEVERE D. WHITE, Treasurer.

Mrs. JUANITA D. FLETCHER, Member, Ex Officio.
Mrs. LOUISE J. HUBBARD, Secretary.

Senator MORSE. Thank you very much, Dr. Carr. Thank you very much, Reverend Hewlett and Dr. Hansen."

We stand in recess until 9 tomorrow morning.

(Whereupon, at 12:20 p.m., the hearing was recessed to reconvene at 9 a.m. on Tuesday, March 15, 1966.)

60-755-66- -9