evidence indicates that the landlord will increasingly have the advantage in terms of supply and demand. Furthermore, a scholarship fund cannot offer the student a stable, solid resource such as that represented by the institutions here proposed. A large proportion of the students, scholarships in hand, would not be able to find programs suited to their capacities and needs at the existing institutions in the community. A responsible citizenry would not choose to shirk its obligation to bear a fair share of the cost of providing the obviously needed additional facilities and faculties for educating its youth.

Members of the Committee, the need for broadened higher educational opportunities in the District of Columbia is pressing. Each June, the secondary schools of the District graduate hundreds of young people who are presently denied the chance to continue their education and thereby obtain the knowledge, the skills, and the employability to stay in the mainstream of our Great Society. These young people can be given the educational opportunity they deserve an opportunity now available in some measure to citizens of all of the 50 States-by the early enactment of legislation providing for the establishment of a public community college and a college of arts and sciences for the Nation's Capital. This I urge you to do through the enactment of this legislation.

May I conclude by saying the Office of Education stands ready to assist in any way it can in the planning and development of the proposed public colleges in the District of Columbia.

Thank you.

Mr. DOWDY. Also there will be included a statement from the Commission on Human Resources.

(The statement referred to follows:)

FEBRUARY 1966.

STATEMENT OF THE COMMISSION ON HUMAN RESOURCES

(A Constituent Agency of the Washington Center for Metropolitan Studies) POSITION PAPER ENTITLED "PUBLIC HIGHER EDUCATION FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA"

The Commission on Human Resources was established in 1960 with the assistance of the Washington Center for Metropolitan studies, a non-governmental organization devoted to research and education in urban affairs. The Commission consists of twenty-one citizens of the metropolitan area who are recognized leaders of the labor, business, and civic community. Since its establishment, the Commission has been seeking to identify and assess the wastes involved in the failure to utilize fully the human resources of the Washington metropolitan area, and to explore ways in which the human potential can be more adequately developed. The Commission, occasionally, after thorough study and discussion, issues Position Papers on subjects of importance to the metropolitan community. Although taking into account the research and studies of the Washington Center, the positions of the Commission emanate solely from its own deliberations and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Center's Board of Trustees or professional staff. The Commission speaks as a disinterested but well informed body of experienced citizens. Members of the Commission are identified at the end of the following statement.

The Commission on Human Resources began its studies and deliberations on the basis of the 1960 census reports and the employment and unemployment figures for that year. We recognized that the full utilization of human resources was of signal importance to the economy of the region and the social well-being of its people.

While engaging in studies of employment and unemployment, the Commission sponsored a series of lectures, conferences, and studies in which national as well as local authorities on education, employment, and youth problems participated. Aside from problems of economic growth and changes in job opportunities, these discussions identified two principal barriers to full employment:

(1) "artificial" barriers, such as race, sex, and age; and (2) the lack of education and skills. All discussions pointed to the same conclusion: artificial barriers, especially discriminatory hiring practices, were beginning to fall, but the need for significant improvements in education and training was largely being ignored.

Indeed, as artificial barriers began to fall, the fundamental need for better education appeared more serious than we had thought at first, because the people most seriously affected by various sorts of discrimination also tended to be those who were least well-educated and most poorly trained in skills demanded by the economy.

The developing view of the Commission during its period of intensive study was bolstered by national findings. One of our members, an economic consultant, asserted in a research report* written in 1964 for a large private utility in the Washington area that:

Only recently . . . has much attention been given to investment in education as a factor in economic growth.

The recent discovery, or conclusion, of economists who have analyzed economic growth in the United States is that the increase in formal education and the advance in knowledge... accounted for 40-45% of the gain in output of goods and services between 1929 and 1957. This is about three times greater than the gain of 15% attributable to the increase in physical capital .

Education is the major source of human capital formation.

The Commission has been impressed with the growing appreciation of the private enterprise economy with regard to the importance of education and training succinctly summarized by M. J. Rathbone of Standard Oil of New Jersey when in 1964 he said, "The most capital that any economy possesses is the skills which people carry around in their heads."

The Commission's increasing conviction that education and training were the most important means of developing human resources was confirmed by a number of studies made by the research staff of The Washington Center for Metropolitan Studies. One effort to understand the anomaly of unemployed workers in the midst of job opportunities was the Commission's sponsorship of a skills survey, "Employment in Metropolitan Washington," published in 1963 by the U.S. Employment Service for the District of Columbia. This survey, plus recent data, has shown that although the total number of jobs in metropolitan Washington has increased since 1960 by about 40,000 annually for the area as a whole, a pool of approximately 20,000 unemployed, mostly in the central city, has remained constant. Our studies have also revealed that business, industry, and government have had to import trained and skilled workers year after year. In spite of this, acute shortages of workers exist at this moment in some occupations, while at the same time many unemployed individuals and their families continue to be a burden to society and a drag on the economy.

We do not, of course, assume that all of those presently unemployed or unemployable can be rehabilitated and employed through education and training. Rather, we believe that we should concentrate upon the education and training of the large numbers of young people who do not now continue their education beyond high school. If more of these are encouraged to seek higher education, including technical and sub-professional occupational training, they will move upward with the economy, fill the needs of the area's employers, and leave the limited number of jobs which do not require skills to the unskilled. As they move up the job ladder, they would create openings for messenger boys, dishwashers and building laborers that could be filled from the present reservoir-and the ever-present inflow-of untrained and, in some cases, less-trainable persons. this way, even those who do not go to college would benefit indirectly from the further training that others would receive.

In

Viewing the economy and the individual's place in it from the perspective of our studies, we saw the State of Maryland advancing with junior colleges and a large and expanding university; we saw Virginia beginning to stir, with the enactment in 1964 of a state-wide plan for technical colleges and the enlargement of the George Mason College, a branch of the University of Virginia in northern Virginia.

In the District of Columbia, and by contrast, there was and is no publiclysupported institution of higher learning except the impoverished D.C. Teachers' College. We assert, most emphatically, that the absence of public higher education in the District of Columbia has retarded the growth of the local economy, deprived individual citizens of full opportunity, and increased the welfare costs of the city of Washington.

Education-A Factor in Economic Growth," Research Report, The Chesapeake and Potomac Telephone Companies, August 1964.

Washington, D.C., ninth largest city in the nation at the time of the 1960 census, is the only large city in this country whose residents are denied access to low-cost, high quality, publicly-supported institutions of higher learning.

The Need for a Community Junior College

In the last few years it has become apparent nearly everywhere in the United States that public two-year colleges beyond high school are necessary if we are to have the technically trained workers which are so desperately needed.

A most pressing higher education need in the District is for a two-year Community College to provide technical, semi-professional and basic liberal arts curricula leading to an Associate of Arts Degree. The college should offer both "terminal" and "transfer" courses of study, thus striking a balance between students who wish to find jobs immediately upon graduation and those who would like to continue their education toward a Bachelor's degree or beyond. Our conception of such a community college has been succinctly described by the Michigan Council of Community College Administrators, as follows:

A community college is a locally controlled, public, two-year institution of higher education which offers broad, comprehensive programs of instruction for persons of post-high school age.

A community college expands opportunities for education beyond the high school by (1) offering programs in occupational, technical, and semiprofessional training for students planning to enter a vocation as well as the first and second year college academic courses for students planning to transfer to four-year colleges or universities, (2) adhering to an "open-door" general admissions policy but being selective in those whom it retains, graduates and recommends for placement, (3) responding to the particular educational needs of the community's total resources in organizing its instructional programs, (4) drawing upon its community's total resources in organizing its instructional programs, (5) enrolling students on a full- or part-time basis, and (6) offering day and evening classes and programs of instruction, and, if economically feasible, on a year round basis.

The Community College should be open to all students with high school diplomas and to others who demonstrate the interest and aptitude required for courses offered by the college. In addition to recent high school graduates, there are unquestionably large numbers of individuals in the District who, because of youthful immaturity or force of circumstances, left school before graduation. Many of this group have now developed greater personal or ecomonic stability and could profit from academic courses or technical training above the high school level. The Community College should be free and open to all who could benefit, whether recent high school graduates or adults seeking to improve their skills.

The importance of this level of education is so fully documented and so nearly universally offered among the fifty states that there can be no doubt of the need for it in the District of Columbia.

The Need for a Four-Year College

We also emphatically assert the need for a publicly supported four-year college which offers degrees in the arts and sciences. Each of the fifty states in the union takes it for granted that such an institution is essential to the cultural life of its people and to the strength of its economy. The District of Columbia performs both state and municipal functions; its population is larger than that of eleven of the states;* yet only the D.C. Teachers' College provides opportunities in higher education for a few citizens.

Each of the fifty states takes pride in its state university and in other publiclysupported liberal arts colleges. In the District of Columbia no comparable institution has given centrality to local pride and progress in higher education. The nation's capital city remains uniquely retarded among the great capital cities of the world in its lack of publicly-supported higher education. Although the general level of educational attainment is high in the District of Columbia by comparison with other American cities, employers' demands for educated and skilled workers are also extraordinarily high. Great opportunities in the sophisticated occupations required in our local economy are missed by large numbers

As of July 1, 1965, the estimated population of the District of Columbia was greater than that of Alaska' Delaware, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, or Wyoming. Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Population Estimates, Series P-25, No. 324, January 20, 1966, p. 14.

of District citizens for lack of education, the level of community well-being remains depressed by the uneducated and unskilled, and our national Capital image in the eyes of the world is decidedly tarnished thereby.

In the beginning of our serious consideration of the need for higher education, some of us, like many other local residents, wondered why the universities now w thin the District could not serve local students. An examination of the facts, however, revealed the reasons. Each of the five established universities is nationally, and even internationally oriented, with large student bodies coming from outside of the District; each is expensive, even for commuting students; each is exercising an increasingly selective admissions policy, as pressures for admissions have grown in recent years. While the five universities in Washington serve many vital needs of the metropolitan area, including advanced training of Federal government employees and the teaching profession of the area, they cannot meet the needs of all of the graduates of District of Columbia high schools who wish to and are prepared to enter college each year. Except for Howard University, the universities accept only token numbers of entering freshmen from the District.

A special word should be said with respect to Howard University. Although about fifty per cent of its funds are from the Federal government, Howard is a privately chartered university with a student body drawn from all over the nation and from diverse geographical areas of the world. Its international mission has increased rapidly in recent years. Although Howard accepts more local students than the other four universities together (around 500 annually), it does not begin to fill the needs of all of those wanting and seeking higher education, many of whom cannot afford even the moderate tuition and costs at Howard, and most of whom cannot be admitted for lack of space and money.

The costs of higher education at the other four local universities are much greater than Howard's. For the academic year which began in the fall of 1965, the five universities charged full-time entering freshmen the following tuition and fees, exclusive of dormitory and meal charges:

The costs of books and supplies must be added to these figures. In addition to the basic costs of tuition, fees and books, the commuting student has many other expenses. Living costs locally, whether the student lives at home or elsewhere, must be reckoned. Someone must meet such costs, whether it is the student himself through part-time work, or his family through their contributions. High tuition at the established local universities, plus the costs of living and commuting, add up to a total cost to the student which is far beyond the means of many students and their families.

Some observers have suggested that a program of scholarships and loans might be instituted to permit District residents to attend college either in or out of the District. The Higher Education Law of 1965 substantially complements existing scholarship and loan plans which might be used in such a way. Yet it is the judgment of administrators of the new Federal law that not more than one in twelve students seeking scholarship and loan help in the District will receive it. The number of District students receiving scholarships of any sort, even should they pass the admissions gate, has always been extremely small.

Various estimates have been made of the number of students who might be expected to attend a four-year District college. The recent report to the President on "Public Higher Education in the District of Columbia" concluded that at least 600 students with the ability to undertake college work are graduated from District secondary schools each year but can afford to continue their studies only in a publicly-supported institution. Since this conclusion was reached, the new incentive programs growing out of the "War on Poverty" have come into play, and these should encourage greater numbers of District students to seek a college education. In addition to recent high school graduates, a considerable number of adults would no doubt take advantage of the new college either to complete their degrees or to undertake college studies for the first time. Why Two New Institutions Are Needed

They

We come now to the important distinction between the two-year community college and the four-year college of arts and sciences. Both are needed. cannot be satisfactorily combined, for their missions differ. The community col

lege is open to all high school graduates and to any adult who can profit from a course being offered. Many students will undertake two-year courses in technical training which will be terminal. The credits will not be transferable to four-year colleges. Some students may take liberal arts subjects whose credits will be transferable, but only if the student achieves a high enough level of scholarship to satisfy the four-year college to which he is transferring. No doubt some young people (those who may be slow to mature or those hitherto unmotivated) will attain records worthy of further collegiate education, but many will not. The community college offers, but does not assure, a basis for further collegiate education. Its open admissions policy and its variety of practical courses distinguish it as the continuing post high school institution of our democratic free school system.

The four-year college of arts and sciences, in contrast to the community college, should have a selective admissions policy, accepting those students it deems fully prepared to undertake college work and who may be expected to complete the work leading to a B.A. or B.S. degree. It would absorb the present D.C. Teachers' College and perform a superior job of teacher training in the broader setting of a good liberal arts curriculum. It would offer a wide range of programs leading to degrees in a variety of fields, thus preparing students for many occupations other than teaching. It could eventually grow into an urban university similar to those which now exist in some of our major cities and which play so large a role in the revitalization of their cities. It could prepare students for the more sophisticated occupations so characteristic of the capital city; it could offer the pre-professional student a solid foundation for undertaking professional training.

Some have asked the question: "Why cannot the community college be started, and later expanded into a four-year college?" The answer, clearly, is that the missions are different, and that, therefore, the standards are different. They cannot be combined without sacrificing the specific objectives peculiar to each.

It may well be that the scarcity of suitable sites in the District of Columbia will require that the two institutions be located physically on neighboring campuses. Indeed, this might permit efficient sharing of certain facilities and staff required by each school. The campuses, administrations, purposes and functions of each institution should remain essentially separate, however, in order to preserve the quite different character of each.

Education and the War on Poverty

The District of Columbia is now embarked on an anti-poverty program designed to overcome the long-standing deprivations of a substantial number of its citizens. We believe that these important programs will inevitably fall short of their goals unless post high school and college education is made readily available to all who can profit. What is often described as a lack of motivation among low. income families and individuals may often be explained by their rational skepticism about the reality of their access to the doors of opportunity. The hope engendered by the new programs in economic opportunity can be easily dashed if the door to higher education is not really open.

Provisions of Special Importance

In the creation of the new system of higher education for the District of Columbia, the Commission on Human Resources wishes to emphasize certain provisions we deem of special importance.

An independent Board of Higher Education for Washington is essential to plan and supervise all new institutions of higher education, and to assume responsibility for the transfer of D.C. Teachers' College to a full-scale liberal arts college.

The new Board of Higher Education should be charged with the responsibility for consulting with business, government, industry, and labor in order to keep course offerings up to date and relevant to the needs of the community for educated personnel.

Tuition should be free, and fees minimal for District residents attending any publicly-supported institutions of higher education.

There is in the Nation's Capital City today a widely shared and deepening desire to make evident and real in daily living our dedication to the most vital and penetrating principles of a democratic society. The fulfillment of such high principles must rest upon an educated and productive citizenry.

For these reasons, we recommend that two publicly-supported institutions of higher learning be created with the utmost feasible dispatch:

A two-year community college open to all high school graduates and others who can qualify for particular courses of study, with a strong component of technical education; and