Inflation has, however, seriously hampered local efforts to improve library facilities. Rising costs, especially for books and periodicals and presumably for audiovisual materials, have meant, in many cases, that increased spending has only enabled schools to stay at levels of adequacy that existed in 1965–66. As can be seen from the above data most Wisconsin schools do not yet have collections of printed and audiovisual materials sufficient to meet the demands placed on them by the instructional programs in modern schools. Increased enrollments and the alarming inflationary rate for instructional resources have prevented many school libraries from meeting recommended minimum state standards. Hopefully, local efforts to better library facilities wil continue to expand and future reports will again show progress in the development of media centers.

Chairman PERKINS. Let me thank all of you for an outstanding

statement.

I deeply regret that there is so little money in the budget and nothing in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act for libraries, but let me propound one general question to all three of you.

Have you found that local school districts cut back on their library book programs as soon as they experience financial problems?

Mrs. HANNA. As far as Michigan goes. There is very little they can cut, and that is one of the areas they do, yes.

Chairman PERKINS. And if that is true, does it not indicate that we need a Federal categorical program such as title II in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to assure that adequate funds be spent on library books?

Mrs. HOFFMAN. I think you have underscored the problem exactly. The school cannot cut down on things that are contracted for, but program funds for things such as this is one sure way of keeping it, so that is why we are urging you to keep this for instructional materials.

Chairman PERKINS. That is what disturbs me about the omission of funds in title II. Here we have a library program that has been worked out between all the private and public schools of the country, and is working so well in all of the States of the Union. I think it is our duty to preserve it. Mr. Quie a question?

Mr. QUIE. No questions.

Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Towell.

Mr. TOWELL. There are several questions I would like to ask of the various people that have testified.

What things are purchased with Federal funds that cannot be purchased with State or local funds?

Mrs. HANNA. I don't believe there is anything that they can buy with the Federal that they cannot buy with local money.

It is just that they need so much more that they need the additional funds.

Mrs. HOFFMAN. In addition to this, many districts have used local funds to apply to personnel and equipment. You cannot purchase these with the ESEA title II funds and in order to make money go as far as possible, local districts have supplied shelving equipment and used Federal funds to provide the materials.

It has been a cooperative venture.

Mr. TOWELL. How well has the nonpublic participation worked? Would you like to see any changes in this particular section of it? Mr. FRANCKOWIAK. My own reaction from the city of Madison, Wis., is that the private school portion of it has been instituted, and they have participated completely in this program, and the response has been very gratifying from the schools.

95-545-73-pt. 1- 25

They are very happy at it, and in fact, they need more support and not less support. I don't know what they would do with the resources because of the limited income they have.

Mrs. HOFFMAN. In Pennsylvania, we have added a new program to aid public schools and the library program, but the library program has been used as a model to do this.

Mrs. HANNA. It has been most successful in Michigan and I belive that this is one of the kinds of programs which will provide for every child, and that every child in Michigan has been treated exactly the same; it makes no difference where they go to school. They have the same kind of program all the way across except that the private schools are owned by the intermeidate districts, but it has provided materials for children and that is what the law is all about.

Mr. TOWELL. You said the private schools were owned by—— Mrs. HANNA. The materials that are used by the students in private schools, the actual ownership and all is in the local public agency. Mr. TOWELL. What share of the Federal money is being spent in the school libraries of the Nation? What proportion? Do you have that figure?

Mrs. HOFFMAN. I can give you these general facts. I have the general idea but I would prefer to submit to you for the record the exact fig. ures on this.

So far Federal funds of course across the board only represent 7 percent of total education. This year we have $90 million from ESEA title II which is a very, very small part of the total budget, and of this, as I mentioned, only 3.8 percent nationally has been used for administration.

Mr. TOWELL. We are talking about the libraries. Your 7 percent was a general across the board.

Mrs. HOFFMAN. Yes, but I can get you the exact figure and give you the figure for libraries.

[The information follows:]

In answer to the question: "What share of Federal monies is being spent on school libraries?", the answer is 1.8%.

[They arrived at this figure by dividing their estimate of $100 million from oil sources, spent on school libraries, into the actual figure given by Commissioner Marland for the Office of Education budget of $5.485 billion.]

Mr. TOWELL. Fine. I had a question here. You mentioned that there has been an increase since 1967. On page 3 here, 1967 to 1970 on hard cover books, a 38.3-percent increase in cost for those books.

Having some knowledge of the educational field and the people that sell books. I sometimes question the practice of continually buying hard backed books, not in all fields but certainly in some where our knowledge and our techniques are changing so rapidly that the additional cost of hard back books is not worth it.

Do you have any feelings about that?

Mr. FRANCKOWIAK. I see across most States and particularly in mine a much larger number of paperback books being used.

I think there is a growing recognition of this, however, it is extremely difficult to build a collection that will last for a long time of material that is of a more permanent nature.

So, I think there is a balancing off. Also in our State there is a trend for not using title II funds for print material and a lot of it is being used for audio visual material.

Mr. TOWELL. I am glad to hear that other people recognize the problem too, and I sincerely hope that they will keep that in mind. Since our technology rapidly changes and since the purchase price of book increases at a high rate, it seems unwise to continue putting money into hard back books that are going to be outdated, in many cases, within a year or two.

Mrs. HOFFMAN. May I suggest with this that the paperback books do wear out fast and this is why they also need to be replaced. Not title for title but with similar titles.

Mr. TOWELL. I realize they have to be replaced, but a book that is going to last longer, if the information is out of date, is pretty useless. Mrs. HOFFMAN. That is correct.

Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Lehman, any questions?

Mr. LEHMAN. No questions.

Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen. You have been most helpful to the committee.

I want to see us protect this library program, and I do not know of any way we can do it other than the categorical approach.

Our next witness is with the National Catholic Library Association, Sister Arline Zurich, accompanied by Sister Mary Arthur Hoagland. Come around and identify yourselves, please.

Do you have separate statements?

TESTIMONY OF SISTER ARLINE ZURICH, REPRESENTING THE NATIONAL CATHOLIC LIBRARY ASSOCIATION AND THE ARCHDIOCESE OF WASHINGTON, AS COORDINATOR OF LIBRARY SERVICES AND ESEA TITLE II; ALSO SISTER MARY ARTHUR HOAGLAND, REPRESENTING THE ARCHDIOCESE OF PHILADELPHIA

Sister ZURICH. Yes, sir, we do.

Chairman PERKINS. Identify yourself for the record, and then proceed.

Sister ZURICH. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, my name is Sister Arline Zurich. I appear today on behalf of the National Catholic Library Association as its legislative committee chairman.

The National Catholic Library Association represents 3,000 Catholic educational institutions throughout the Nation. I am also the coordinator of library services and ESEA title II coordinator for the 119 Catholic schools in the Archdiocese of Washington which includes the District of Columbia and five Maryland counties. The combined enrollment of the archdiocesan schools totals approximately 44,500 pupils.

I am grateful for the opportunity to submit this statement for the record of hearings of this committee on the Elementary and Secondary Education Amendments of 1973..

I appear today to express my concern that title II of ESEA, a program very valuable to both public and private school pupils, may be terminated. I support H.R. 69 which authorizes the extension of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, including title II school library resources, textbooks, and other instructional materials. As you are aware, title II of ESEA authorizes that these resources be made available to private schools on an equitable basis. My experience. with this program, extending over the past 7 years, enables me to

tell you very frankly that it would be a tragedy for parochial and private school children and teachers, as well as for public school personnel, if the program is terminated.

Title II has proven to be the most effective of all Federal programs for serving private school pupils with tangible benefits and with a minimum of effort and red tape. Title II acquisition funds are authorized only for the purchase of print and nonprint materials, very greatly needed for instruction in our schools. According to USOE, 94.1 percent of private school children and teachers are benefiting from this program.

Beyond requiring that local schools and school districts maintain their financial support for library programs, an outstanding feature of title II has been the incentive it has given them to strengthen their commitment to upgrading the quality of those programs.

Therefore, title II has consistently strengthened the resources of materials available to boys and girls, and in some cases, provided them where there were none previously.

Title II provided the means for schools to initiate or expand materials in media centers precisely at the time pupils had increased need for books and audiovisual materials for greatly augmented curricula.

The ability to read and interpret media is a very important and needed skill for today's world. At a time when such great interest and even presidential support has been given to the right to read program, it seems most inconsistent to terminate title II which is being used to supply a substantial amount of the materials needed to implement right to read.

I think all of us are aware of the tremendous financial pressures upon parochial and private school budgets. I do not hesitate to assert that unless the title II program is continued, in one form or another, children will be deprived of books for reading and learning and schools whose commitment to decent library services was spurred by this program will be forced either to take funds from other critical needs or, as is more likely, abandon or retrench their library programs.

This is not an argument of books for books' sake. Nothing could be more foolish. The argument is for educational results-hard facts which demonstrate significant improvement in educational performance.

In the elementary and secondary schools throughout the Archdiocese of Washington which have been participating in the title II program and maintaining financial effort the pupils are reaching a higher level of achievement in the "national standards" test scores in relation to other schools in the same area.

Without Federal resources, 44.545 pupils in the archdiocesan school system and about 5.4 million children in private schools plus 51.2 millions of others in the public school system will lose a program that has proved its effectiveness.

Title II of ESEA is a program which warrants, perhaps demands, your most serious efforts to preserve. At least, that is my view and the view of all those for whom I speak today.

On my behalf and theirs, I wish to thank you for this opportunity to express our convictions of the urgent need to continue aid for the provision of school library resources and other materials.

Mr. LEHMAN (presiding). Thank you, Sister Zurich.

I would prefer to have Sister Mary Arthur Hoagland give her statement and ask questions at the same time.

Because of a possible quorum call, I think instead of reading your paper entirely, just refer to those portions not already covered. Sister HOAGLAND. My name is Sister Mary Arthur Hoagland. Our school system covers five counties and a little over 225,000 children. I represent the Catholic Library Association. Title II has been one of the most successful programs supported by Congress. It has included aid to all children and involved administrators, teachers, and parents in what has been a really cooperative effort.

Four years ago, I made this statement in this Congress and it is just as valid now as it was then. The program has been examined by both State and Federal officials, and they can attest to its contribution to education itself.

Children are reading books, they are using materials. Title II seeded a program that has interested parents as did no other program in our schools. There is no stronger parent-aid group than the library aides who now are becoming assistants in the classroom and volunteer reading aides.

Comparable effort has been taken very seriously by the parents despite the fact that cake sales, book fairs, and like programs had to finance the library effort and school tuition has become a very heavy burden. They have been able to continue the struggle and never once has the library program been neglected.

Parents, because of their involvement in the program, are aware, as are we, that teachers need books and materials as we strive to individualize instruction and train our children to explore, inquire, and learn, and for this, they need a variety of materials.

Home and school associations became very, very active. They, themselves, had to supply machinery, buildings, facilities, et cetera ; therefore, it often left them short of funding that would have provided books.

In the past 4 years, 106 schools in our diocese alone have enlarged their quarters, and since the advent of this program, 269 new libraries were built as a result of the impetus of title II.

These were especially appreciated in the poorer counties, Philadelphia and Delaware County. The comparable effort in these areas was often a great struggle, but the interested parents really tried--hampered often by the fact that they had to drop out and go to work just to keep the children fed and in school.

The growth has been slow when viewed by standards of need. The national standard requires 25 books per child: State standards in our area say 10 books. At the moment, our average is six books which means that we are 60 percent on the way to a program that we really planned for very carefully.

At this point, we must sometimes limit circulations just to be surethat each child can get one book a week to read and this usually in curriculum areas.

The expense of setting up the physical plant left little funds with which to buy the books. Title I aided with visuals in some of our schools, but books, the real core of a reading program, are still wanting in sufficient numbers.

Many of the schools average only three books per child and this is in the area where the children need the most, the deprived areas, where there are few educational opportunities at home and where the children. really must rely upon us for any cultural material.