We have made a survey of the six larger institutions. We did not. include the last 2, for no reason at all but to show the larger institutions and their enrollment and the number of freshmen from graduating classes of the District of Columbia who enrolled in these institutions in September; the table shows that in September 1965 in these 6 institutions 5,063 freshmen enrolled. Of this number, only 684 were members of the District's 1965 high school graduating class, representing 11/10 percent of the total freshmen enrolled in these institutions.

There were, however, a total of 4,160 students graduated from the Washington, D.C., public high schools in 1965. Of this number, only 684 enrolled in colleges and universities within the District of Columbia, which represents 164/10 percent of the total 1965 Washington, D.C., graduating class. We have no way of knowing how many of these 4,160 high school graduates entered institutions of higher education in other localities and some of the smaller institutions. We suspect that this number was minimal.

We do know, however, that across the Nation 54 percent of all 1965 high school graduates entered a college or university in September 1965. The low percentage in Washington, D.C., is due to two things only inadequate facilities and the high cost of education.

Referring now to page 5, we have in support of the legislation the following proposals to make:

First, give full assurance of low-cost or tuition-free educational opportunity.

Second, in view of the experience in Philadelphia and other cities where judges appointed the board of education, we would sincerely urge that this procedure have a terminal date, at which time more satisfactory methods be provided.

Third, we support the merger of the District of Columbia Teachers College with the new institution of higher education.

But, fourth, in any such merger we would seek an assurance that the rights and tenures of teachers be safeguarded as outlined in the Salary Act of 1955.

Fifth, we would oppose leaving laboratory schools under the control and management of the Board of Education as distinct from the Board of Higher Education. A close relationship should exist between the laboratory schools and, particularly, the teacher training institution. Sixth, we respectfully urge that in vesting the Board of Higher Education with authority to set up retirement and leave regulations that they be directed to provide the safeguards now contained in Public Law 262, enacted by the 87th Congress.

Seventh, that enactment of this legislation contain assured appropriations to guarantee that the new institutions will become an educational showpiece, not only in operational material, but in their ability to employ competent, qualified, well-paid personnel. Unless this is done, there can be no guarantee that the institution will be an improvement upon the disreputable facilities now in existence at the District of Columbia Teachers College.

Senator, we compliment you and your colleagues for this legislation and we sincerely and wholeheartedly support its enactment with the recommendations that we have made.

Senator MORSE. Thank you very much for your statement. I shall examine very carefully the reservations which you make in your statement, many of which I find myself tentatively in agreement with. Thank you very much.

Mr. MEGEL. Thank you.

(The statement follows:)

STATEMENT OF CARL J. MEGEL

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is Carl J. Megel. I am the Washington representative of the American Federation of Teachers, a national organization of more than 115,000 classroom teachers, affiliated with the AFL-CIO.

Our organization embraces nearly 600 teacher locals, including locals in Alaska, Hawaii, and Canal Zone, and the Department of Defense oversea dependents' schools.

Representing the American Federation of Teachers, I am privileged to appear before this committee in support of S. 293, the District of Columbia Public Higher Education Act.

In supporting this legislation, I do so not only with the support of the executive council of the American Federation of Teachers, but also through mandate of the American Federation of Teachers' National Convention, which unanimously approved by convention resolution the establishment of higher education facilities in the District of Columbia.

We commend Senator Morse and the cosponsors for the introduction of this legislation which, when enacted, will provide, “a public community college and a 4-year public college of arts and sciences in the District of Columbia."

George Washington advocated federally financed higher education for the District of Columbia. We think the more than 170-year delay in fulfilling his recommendation is much too long.

If a university for Washington, D.C., was desirable in George Washington's time, its existence today is an absolute essential. Even now technology has made advanced education a necessity. It is estimated that if the university were to open in September 1966, its first graduating class would find that 70 percent of all job specifications require 2 or more years of college or university training. This fact alone predicates speediest action possible.

Each day's delay in establishing a 4-year institution of higher education constitutes a serious loss, not only for the community and the Nation, but especially for the disadvantaged younger generation of the District of Columbia. Washington, D.C., high school graduates have traditionally been required to move out of their area to receive benefits of higher education, or to accept the advantages offered by the six major academic institutions within the District. These institutions are American University, Catholic University, Georgetown University, George Washington University, Howard University, and the Washington, D.C., Teachers College.

We made a check of these six institutions to determine the enrollment in the freshman class for September 1965, and to determine the number of the District's 1965 public high school graduates who are enrolled as freshmen in these respective universities and colleges.

The following table shows the results of the comparison between the number of freshmen who are enrolled in these institutions and the number of these enrolled freshmen who are graduates of the District's public schools.

This table shows that in September 1965 there were 5,063 freshmen enrolled in these 6 institutions.

Of this number only 684 were members of the District's 1965 high school graduating classes--which represents 11.4 percent of the total freshmen enrollment in these institutions.

There were, however, a total of 4,160 students graduated from all Washington, D.C., public high schools in 1965. Of this number only 684 enrolled in colleges and universities within the District of Columbia-which represents 16.4 percent of the total 1965 Washington, D.C., graduating class.

We have no way of knowing how many of these 4,160 high school graduates entered institutions of higher education in other localities. We suspect that this number was minimal.

We do know, however, that across this Nation 54 percent of all 1965 high school graduates entered a college or university in September 1965.

The low percentage of Washington, D.C., high school graduates who enrolled in institutions in higher learning in 1965 can be directly attributed to two things: 1. Inadequate facilities, and

2. The high cost of higher education.

Practically every other community in the United States offers its high school graduates the opportunity of higher education in a publicly supported institution. This is not true in Washington, D.C.

Only those Washington, D.C., parents who are financially able to afford higher education in private institutions can offer these advantages to their children. Otherwise, they have the choice of moving into a district where there is an institution of higher education which is publicly supported or requiring their young high school graduates to forego higher education.

In conclusion, we heartily support the proposed legislation, but respectfully request serious consideration of the following inclusions:

First, give full assurance of low cost or tuition-free educational opportunity. Second, in view of the experience in Philadelphia and other cities where judges appointed the board of education, we would sincerely urge that this procedure have a terminal date, at which time more satisfactory methods be provided.

Third, we support the merger of the District of Columbia Teachers College with the new institution of higher education.

Fourth, in any such merger we would seek an assurance that the rights and tenures of teachers be safeguarded as outlined in the Salary Act of 1955.

Fifth, we would oppose leaving laboratory schools under the control and management of the Board of Education as distinct from the Board of Higher Education. A close relationship should exist between the laboratory schools and, particularly, the teacher training institution.

Sixth, we respectfully urge that in vesting the Board of Higher Education with authority to set up retirement and leave regulations that they be directed to provide the safeguards now contained in Public Law 262, enacted by the 87th Congress.

Seventh, that enactment of this legislation contain assured appropriations to guarantee that the new institutions will become an educational showpiece, not only in operational material, but in their ability to employ competent, qualified, well-paid personnel. Unless this is done, there can be no guarantee that the institution will be an improvement upon the disreputable facilities now in existence at the District of Columbia Teachers College.

We are grateful for the opportunity to make this presentation, and we commend the committee for its efforts. We wholeheartedly support the intent of the legislation and urgently request serious consideration of our recommendations.

Senator MORSE. While Mr. Megel was testifying I was urged further to get to an emergency meeting. I now announce that the hearing will recess until 2:30 this afternoon. We will finish the testimony of the remaining witnesses so that I can close the public hearings today and will close the hearing record at 5 p.m. on Tuesday, March 29.

I want counsel to notify the previous witnesses that I am closing it. That gives them this weekend, Monday and Tuesday to prepare any rebuttal statement or any additional statement that they want to put in the hearing record. Be sure to have the District Commissioners notified in case they want to file any supplemental statement, although

let the record also show that following the closing of the hearing record at 5 p.m. on the 29th of March, the chairman, on behalf of the committee, will reserve the right to call upon any witnesses that have appeared or any individuals that have not appeared for supplemental statements if they wish to volunteer them. We will also call in, if we deem it appropriate as we discuss the bill, individuals to advise with us at the professional level before we finally make our recommendation.

I am advised that Dr. Carolyn C. Howlett, legislative chairman of the Women's Alliance, All Souls Church, Washington, D.C., will not be present to testify this afternoon and desires that her statement be inserted in the record, and that will be done at this point.

(The statement follows:)

STATEMENT OF CAROLYN C. HOWLETT, LEGISLATIVE CHAIRMAN, WOMEN'S ALLIANCE, ALL SOULS CHURCH, WASHINGTON, D.C.

I am Mrs. Duncan Howlett and I represent the Women's Alliance of All Souls Unitarian Church, located at 16th and Harvard Streets NW., Washington, D.C. Our women's alliance has a membership of 180, the majority of whom are citizens of the District of Columbia, but all of whom reflect their interest in the concerns of this city by their association with our metropolitan church.

For many years a number of our members have vigorously urged that greater opportunity for education beyond the high school should be made available to the young men and women who live in the District of Columbia. This year our legislative committee has made a special study of the problem and on their recommendation our membership voted to support legislation to establish the kinds of institutions provided for in the bills under consideration.

New or expanded institutions of higher learning of all types are being established all over this country, as it becomes universally recognized that posthigh school training will be more and more essential to qualify for the employment market of the future and to face the complexities of our society. Every State and many cities now have public colleges. It is only here, in this the Nation's Capital, that residents have no publicly supported college where they may obtain a liberal arts degree or specialized technical training at modest cost. We have only the limited District of Columbia Teachers College, to which I shall refer again later.

Even if private colleges could, or would, absorb all of our residents who are qualified to benefit from higher education, many of them would be barred by the cost. How can we even begin to guess how many now do not qualify, or fall short of their full potential, because ambition is stifled or incentive lost when boys and girls know that even if they were to qualify they could not aspire to higher education.

We believe that both a 4-year college of arts and sciences and a 2-year community college are needed in this city if our young people are to have the opportunities they need and deserve. We also support the merger of the District of Columbia Teachers College into the new liberal arts college as provided by S. 293. While we were investigating the need for higher education facilities here, a delegation from our committee visited District of Columbia Teachers College. We saw that it is all housed in two pre-World War I structures, separated by nearly a mile of crowded and busy city streets. We saw its well-worn corridors and classrooms and equipment, its limitations of space and the way many areas had had to be converted into uses for which they were not intended. We noted that the top floor of one building could not be used because condemned as a fire hazard. We found all the outdoor recreation area had been sacrificed to parking. Obviously the two buildings which served over half a century ago could not be adequate in the light of all the changes that have taken place in the intervening 53 years, both in the size and composition of our city and in educational techniques. We commend the dedication and competence of the faculty but no one can deny the handicaps under which they work.

We learned, also, that teacher training today is thought to be best carried on in a broader educational setting so that there are few teachers colleges left which exist exclusively for the training of teachers. Accordingly, we believe

that Washington also needs a liberal arts college to help provide the greater number of well-qualified teachers which will be required as our public elementary and secondary schools increase in number and strength.

Education is acknowledged to be one of the most important weapons in the war on poverty. Incentive and opportunity are both essential to accomplishment, and we believe that all our young people should have equal opportunity to reach their fullest potential. To this end, both of the colleges provided for by S. 293 should be established in this city as soon as possible.

Senator MORSE. We will reconvene at 2:30.

(Whereupon, at 11:40 a.m. the subcommittee recessed to reconvene at 2:30 p.m. the same day.)

AFTERNOON SESSION

(The subcommittee reconvened at 2:30 p.m., Senator Wayne Morse, chairman of the subcommitee, presiding.)

Senator MORSE. Senator Gruening, I am delighted to hear you now.

STATEMENT OF HON. ERNEST GRUENING, A U.S. SENATOR FROM
THE STATE OF ALASKA

Senator GRUENING. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
It is a privilege to testify before your committee.

The District of Columbia should have a modern public city college. I feel that the need is obvious and overdue. If we are to have a Great Society, then we must provide the necessary building blocks for that Great Society.

As President Johnson said in his message to the Congress on international education and health on February 2, 1966:

Our resources will be wasted in defending freedom's frontiers if we neglect the spirit that makes men want to be free.

These words apply at home as well as abroad.

In January of last year, I was pleased to join with you and six of our Senate colleagues in cosponsoring S. 293, which provides for the establishment of a public community college and a public college of arts and sciences in the District of Columbia. I wish to express again my support of this legislation.

I am sure that other Senators, leaders in civic and religious organizations, Government officials, and many public-spirited private citizens have brought to this hearing statistical material that shows the great inadequacy of the District of Columbia's present facilities for public higher education.

I wish only to add a pertinent comment about higher education in Alaska. In my State, the people have long sought to make higher education available to all who can profit from it. Progress toward the attainment of this goal has been particularly gratifying in recent years.

Over the past 6 years, there has been a gain of 189 percent in the appropriations of State tax funds for operating expenses of the University of Alaska. Our university system now includes six branch 2-year colleges, each one an accredited institution.

The record of the growth in services of the community college at Anchorage offers a striking example of what the proposed liberal arts college and community college can mean to the citizens, young students, and adults of the District of Columbia.