The CHAIRMAN. Of course, basically, it is a problem of the American people, is it not?

Dr. MEISTER. That is right.

The CHAIRMAN. They have to be challenged, so to speak, so that we may move forward, is that not right?

Dr. MEISTER. That is right, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Because in the final analysis they determine our course. I was much interested last night in reading the lead article in the magazine section of the New York Times of last Sunday, written by Mark Raeff.

Dr. MEISTER. I read that article.

The CHAIRMAN. Did you read that article?

Dr. MEISTER. Yes, I did.

The CHAIRMAN. He is an associate professor of history at Clark University in Massachusetts, now in Europe doing research work. It is a most interesting article, you agree, do you not?

Dr. MEISTER. Yes, I do.

ARTICLE BY MARK RAEFF

The CHAIRMAN. Among other things, he says:

What is wrong, fundamentally, with American education? Two things. It does not train for mental work and it teaches little. It would seem that the first business of a school is to train the student to work with his head. That is a habit that takes time to develop and should be started early. The trouble with American schools, especially high schools, is that they seldom force a student to make serious efforts. They do not accustom him to systematic, constant hard work. There seems to be a general reluctance in our civilization to push a child to make him do the things we believe are right.

I judged from your statement here this morning that you share somewhat the feelings expressed in that article.

Dr. MEISTER. Yes, I do. Very much so.

The CHAIRMAN. Doctor, I do not want to testify myself, but I went to school under an old professor for 5 years. He used to say our heads were not just something to keep our bodies from unraveling, and were put there by God Almighty to think and to work with. That was his doctrine, to think and then to work hard.

These courses that you were speaking about were required courses. No pupils could go to his school unless they took Latin and chemistry and physics and what we know as the harder subjects.

Now we are confronted with the proposition: We know we need scientists and mathematicians and engineers. We know we need technicians. I am glad you referred to them, too; because as you say we have to have them along with the scientists.

We know also that our educational system is built on administration and control in the States, in local communities, and in private institutions of learning. I firmly believe it should be that way.

WHAT CAN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DO?

The question then comes-with the Federal Government having the direct, immediate, overall responsibility for the national defense, and these scientists, engineers, and mathemeticians, and technicians needed for national defense-what can the Federal Government do? What

do you think it should do in this situation, while at the same time, holding fast to the fundamental idea of leaving the control and administration of our schools where they have been from the beginning, in our State and local communities and in our private colleges?

Dr. MEISTER. I would like to see a program that goes much farther than has been proposed by our President. I would be inclined to accept some of the directions to which he is pointing. For example, I feel that we ought to help States to set up a program that would identify, much earlier than we do now, the able children in our midst. I feel that it does not have to destroy State control of our educational procedures at all.

FEDERAL AID TO EDUCATION

We have had much experience in this country of turning over to the State educational authorities the assistance and the help the Federal Government feels it needs to give in days of emergency. I need not tell you, Senator, of the many such areas in which the Federal Government has helped education, and without control, without changing the basic philosophy of our country.

I think we should extend that. I think the States should be encouraged to introduce a program of elementary science. I think our education in science begins way down in the grades. I think we ought to support policies and practices that will tend to give us teachers better trained in science at all educational levels.

I am very much in favor of good programs of guidance and counseling. Again, the Federal Government can offer assistance, in some instances on a matching basis, but with the control still left to the State authorities.

The CHAIRMAN. You mean such as we do and have done for some years now in our vocational educational programs?

EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS

Dr. MEISTER. The Smith-Hughes Act. Yes, I agree.

I would like to offer one suggestion that I have not yet seen in many of the proposals. I have been a great believer all my life in the extracurriculum program which should parallel the school program. In the areas of science we have such things as science clubs, science fairs, excursions to science related institutions in the communities all over the country.

I would like to see these grow, because they seize the interest of the young people and they provide creative opportunities for these young people in the sciences.

I dare say our Edisons might come to the fore much more effectively through the kind of experimentation that goes on in a science club in a cellar of a house or in a barn or in a garage. We are not doing enough to stimulate this kind of activity. I think States might be helped in that direction.

The CHAIRMAN. You think they might be helped, as you say, in the training of teachers, with the control left entirely in the hands of the States?

Dr. MEISTER. Yes, sir.

LABORATORY FACILITIES

The CHAIRMAN. What about facilities, laboratories, and equipment, and things of that kind?

Dr. MEISTER. A great deal can be done there. Sometimes the wherewithal for performing experiments is not available, such simple things as a demonstration table, not a very expensive item, but a table that will give running water, illumination gas, an outlet for electricity. This is the essential equipment for the carrying on of experiments. So many schools lack these basic facilities.

There should be one or more microscopes in every school. I think we would all be interested to learn how many schools there are in the country at the secondary school level that do not have such things as microscopes.

That, too, would be of tremendous help to stimulate the entire interest in science at this time.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you think that the Government might provide some funds to be matched by the States?

Dr. MEISTER. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Or the local communities?

Dr. MEISTER. I would heartily agree with such a proposal.

EFFECT OF SCHOLARSHIPS

The CHAIRMAN. Doctor, do you think scholarships might well serve the purpose of challenging, stimulating, and encouraging young people in elementary and secondary schools to try to win one of these scholarships and to work harder and take these harder, tougher courses like the courses in science?

Dr. MEISTER. Yes.

I have been in a good position to observe the effects of the scholarship offers at our school. I think New York State is 1 of 2 or 3 that offer statewide scholarships. It has always amazed me what that has done to raise the tone of work, because individuals do respond to challenge.

I do not think that going to college is altogether based on financial means. Motivations are also important. However, the financial factor plays a very important part in many, many homes. Particularly in these days when a college education is mounting in cost, it is almost prohibitive for the middle brackets.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you think that scholarships would provide a motivation, not only to get boys and girls in college, but to get them into the harder courses in science and mathematics and foreign languages where we need them today?

Dr. MEISTER. Undoubtedly so, because the award of scholarship in many instances is made on the basis of examination, scores in examinations, the college board scores, and other types of statewide systems of examinations. These examinations demand a type of understanding that can be had only through serious study and application for work in school.

The CHAIRMAN. Your presentation this morning was so interesting that many questions come to mind, but I will ask my friend, Senator Allott, if he would like to ask any questions.

Senator ALLOTT. Yes, I would.

Doctor, I want to express my own appreciation for your remarks this morning which I think are very challenging, particularly since we are all, at least on the surface, aware of your own institution and the work that you have done.

SCHOOLS LACKING SPECIAL CURRICULUM

One think that occurs to me is this: Do you have, as you have stated, a separate situation with which you are dealing in the Bronx High School of Science?

Throughout the country, and in New York as well, there are thousands of high schools where no opportunity exists for the special attention and the special curriculum that you are able to accomplish at your particular school. So my remarks are questions that would be more directed in thinking in terms of these other thousands.

You spoke of taking bold and imaginative action. These are your words. Now the curriculum, the kind of school, the type of school we have at the secondary and the primary level is the result of the kind and type of school to which people have either been educated or have allowed themselves to accept, and they are the ones who control it at the local level. Is this not true?

Dr. MEISTER. Yes.

Senator ALLOTT. Again, all through this, I am separating myself from your one school. I am talking generally.

What can this committee do, or what can Congress do, in your mind, to get our people to take this bold and imaginative action that you speak of? To me this is the crux of the thing.

COMMUNITY ACTION

Dr. MEISTER. Senator, I think you have pointed to perhaps the most important problem in this area.

I would attempt an answer by first pointing out that the degree to which any community can give effective attention to the able segments of the population depends upon how concentrated is the population. It is easy to do it in New York City, in Chicago, in Philadelphia, in Boston. It is not so easy to do it in a community where there is perhaps but 1 high school with a population of 500.

It becomes more and more expensive as population becomes more and more sparse. Therefore, it seems to me, that effective help could be given if financial assistance were made available to communities who wish to develop unique programs.

Even in New York City there are children who live so far away from the Bronx High School of Science that the problem of travel makes it impossible for these children to attend.

There, schools within schools are developed. One hundred to two hundred children are given a special program, a special track. That is a good answer for that situation.

As I study the census figures, I would say that any community big enough to support 6 or 7 highschools, each with a population of 500, could afford to set up 1 special-purpose school.

In communities that cannot support that many schools, the answer would lie in developing a track or a program where good minds would be brought together for special work. That would be a bit more expensive.

TIGHTENING UP EDUCATIONAL PROCESSES

Senator ALLOTT. Doctor, you have explored this one method. Is there not a great opportunity to start at the lowest educational level, in the first grade, and tighten up our educational processes from there right on through high school? In other words, at the high-school level, a huge investment in laboratories or physics and chemistry is not a necessity.

Dr. MEISTER. Not huge investments; no. But some investment; yes.

Senator ALLOTT. Well, many schools have some investment in this. In other words, what I am driving at is: Is there not a tremendous opportunity in this whole field simply by putting pressure on and taking the standards away from mediocrity and tightening up our whole educational process so that boys and girls do know something about business, they do know something about Spanish, if you will; they do know something about French, they do know something about chemistry when they get out of high school, so that they are not merely just treading water for 4 years in going through high school. Cannot something be done to tighten up our whole educational process so that what they have is theirs and worth something?

TESTING PROGRAMS AS YARDSTICKS

Dr. MEISTER. The only sound educational way that I know of, of tightening up standards, is to have yardsticks against which communities can refer. That means broad testing programs that would be controlled by the State.

I think that the State system of uniform examinations we have in New York is very interesting. Perhaps you know about our regents examinations. All schools require their young people to take examinations in all fields. The results tell the authorities whether they are measuring up to standards, and what the relative degree of success is, as between one school and another.

Senator ALLOTT. Do you think anything could be done upon a national level, not toward the control of the curriculum, but toward providing minimum standards or standards, I will say, for the States?

Dr. MEISTER. That would be a very sensitive area and might be viewed in some quarters as perhaps undermining our State control of education.

On the other hand, nationwide commissions could be formed in which this question of standards would be considered without necessarily controlling what any one State would like to do.

In the course of time, I feel certain that, through these advisory commissions, we would be jacking standards up everywhere.

Senator ALLOTT. You spoke of reexamination. That was the word you used with respect to our educational system?

Dr. MEISTER. Yes.

Senator ALLOTT. Do you have in mind some general tightening up of our educational processes?

Dr. MEISTER. Yes.

22201-58---9