CHAPTER VII. OTHER EDUCATIONAL MATTERS OF Some important educational matters of concern to the 84th Congress not dealt with elsewhere in this report are the following: A. RACIAL SEGREGATION IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS In a decision in 1896 upholding the right of a State to enforce segregation on intrastate trains, the Supreme Court of the United States gave recognition to the "separate but equal doctrine" of biracial education. The Court held that segregation laws were within the power of a State, and that they did not necessarily imply the inferiority of either race. In this connection the Court declared that: The establishment of separate schools for white and colored children * * * has been held a valid exercise of the legislative power even by courts of States where the political rights of the colored race have been longest and most earnestly enforced. Controversies over the question of constitutionality of the "separate but equal" doctrine and other considerations led to the momentous Supreme Court decision of May 17, 1954, on this subject. The Court stated and answered the issue partly as follows: Does segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis of race, even though the physical facilities and other "tangible" factors may be equal, deprive the children of the minority group of equal educational opportunities? believe that it does. We The decision of the Court was incomplete in that it left open for further argument the question of how to implement this decision. Whether integration should be accomplished by a gradual process or should be required by a fixed date the Court must yet determine. The question is not an issue pending in Congress in the same sense as some other issues dealt with in this report. At the time of this writing no bills providing specifically for implementation of the Supreme Court decision is pending. However, such a bill might be introduced at any time. Some pending bills contain features which apparently take into consideration the segregation issue. B. FINANCIAL AID TO STUDENTS IN HIGHER EDUCATION At the time of this writing at least eight bills proposing some form of financial aid to students in higher education are pending in the 84th Congress. At least 6 of these bills have been referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor, and 1 to each of the following committees-the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, and the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare. The Federal Scholarship Act introduced on January 5, 1955 (H. R. 33, Mr. Boland and H. R. 355, Mr. Donohue) proposes to provide for loans to enable needy and scholastically qualified students to continue post-high-school education. The act would establish a Federal scholarship revolving fund which would consist of Federal appropriations, payments into the fund by the participating States, and payments back into the fund by student borrowers. The Defense Scholarships Act of 1955 (introduced as H. R. 286 on January 5 by Representative Osmers, and as S. 980 on February 8 by Senator Cotton) proposes to provide a system of scholarships for persons of unusual ability in certain sciences. The scholarships would be administered by the United States Commissioner of Education. S. 296, introduced on January 10, 1955, by Senator Langer, would provide for loans by the United States Commissioner of Education to individuals to enable them to obtain a college or university education. This bill is considerably different from the other pending student loan bills, H. R. 33 and H. R. 355. The National Defense Scientific Education Act, H. R. 2179, introduced on January 13, 1955, by Representative Powell, proposes to increase the supply of scientific and technical manpower in the United States by providing a system of scholarships for college and graduate level study of scientific subjects, to be administered by the Commissioner of Education. Title I is introduced by a statement of policy. H. R. 2197, introduced on January 13, 1955, by Representative Sikes, proposes to establish an effective student exchange program with Latin American countries. The bill would create a Board of Latin American Scholarships to recommend students for scholarships and perform other duties including advising the Secretary of State, who would generally administer the student exchanges. The Student Aid Act of 1955, H. R. 2211, introduced on January 13, 1955, by Representative Thompson of New Jersey, would establish a broad program of financial aid to students in higher education. Title II would provide scholarships for young persons of demonstrated ability and need. Title III would make provision for insurance of loans to students in institutions of higher education. Closely related to these proposals in basic philosophy are various pending bills which would amend the Internal Revenue Code to provide credit against the individual income tax for amounts paid as tuition or fees to institutions of higher education. Among these bills is H. R. 4444, which incorporates a plan recommended by the American Council on Education. This bill was introduced on February 25 by Representative Donald L. Jackson. C. STATE AND WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCES ON EDUCATION Pursuant to recommendations from President Eisenhower, the 83d Congress enacted Public Law 530, approved July 26, 1954. The act authorized appropriations to enable the President to hold in Washington, D. C., before November 30, 1955, a conference broadly representative of educators and other interested citizens from all parts of the Nation, to be called the White House Conference on Education. The purpose of the Conference is to consider and report to the President on significant and pressing problems in the field of education. The act also authorized grants for State conferences on education, and appropriations for Federal administrative expenses. To assist each State to bring together, prior to the White House Conference on Education, educators and other interested citizens to discuss educational problems in the State and make recommendations for appropriate action to be taken at local, State, and Federal levels, the act authorized an appropriation of $1 million. It provided for the allotment of appropriated Federal funds to the States on the basis of their respective populations. For the purpose of the act the term "State" includes the District of Columbia, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands. For the current fiscal year (1955) the Congress appropriated $900,000 for the State and White House Conferences. Of this amount, $700,000 was for distribution to the States as grants-in-aid for their conferences. It is expected that the remainder of their expense will be met from other sources. The President's budget for 1956 requests an additional appropriation of $200,000 for the salaries and expenses of the staff of the White House Conference. The Conference will convene in Washington, D. C., on November 20, and will extend through December 1, 1955. It will be the first conference of its kind called by a President of the United States. The States and Territories will respectively appoint their delegates. The President's conference committee has asked that the delegates be chosen by State selection committees so as to represent the greatest possible diversity "in terms of racial, religious, political, economic, and social backgrounds.' Plans of the committee call for participation of two or more noneducators for each educator. The Conference Committee has announced that the agenda will consist of the following main topics for discussion: (1) What should our schools accomplish? (2) In what ways can we organize our school systems more efficiently and economically? (3) What are our school building needs? (4) How can we get enough school teachers-and keep them? How can we finance our schools-build and operate them? How can we obtain a continuing public interest in education? The President's Conference Committee will prepare the final report. It will be based upon the reports from the State conferences, the reports from the discussions in Washington, and the independent studies of the experts on the President's Committee. D. COMPREHENSIVE TRAINING PROGRAM FOR FEDERAL EMPLOYEES During the 83d Congress the House Committee on Post Office and Civil Service engaged in a broad study of employee training problems of the Federal Government. The committee obtained relevant information through hearings, official inquiries to Government agencies and selected private industries, and advice from recognized authorities on the subject. A digest of the basic information developed by the committee, and its findings and recommendations thereon are combined in a committee print dated December 18, 1954. The introduction states that— This study of training, conducted pursuant to House Resolution 32, 83d Congress, arose from information and evidence developed in the committee's field hearings, which indicate that better service and major savings will result from a strengthened governmentwide system of training Federal employees. The study disclosed that lack of a comprehensive training program represents a serious weakness in the administration of the Federal civil service. Some of the specific findings from the committee study are the following (quoted from the committee print): There is no general, governmentwide training legislation. Most agencies have no positive legislative authority for training employees. The committee and Civil Service Commission studies point up the need for improved training of Federal personnel at all levels. There should be a statement of congressional policy that outside training shall not be a substitute for continued and strengthened training programs using Government facilities. In a special message to the 84th Congress on January 11, 1955, President Eisenhower said: Attainment of the greatest possible efficiency in governmental operations is a major goal of this administration. Achievement of this goal requires the effective use of training facilities, outside as well as within Government, to maintain a high level of competence in the Federal civilian career service. Most civilian agencies of Government do not have comprehensive and adequate training programs, chiefly because there is no general statutory authority to use outside training facilities. Although it is clearly in the Government's interest to do so, many agencies now cannot send employees to private laboratories, industrial plants, universities, or State agencies for critically needed training in the use of new methods, techniques, and machines. A comprehensive training program should be authorized that will (1) permit Government agencies to use outside facilities for training required to meet operating needs when it is in the Government's interest, (2) consolidate in one law the training authorities now carried in many separate statutes, and (3) permit the establishment of governmentwide policies and effective controls on the use of outside training facilities. On January 17, 1955, Representative Rees of Kansas introduced H. R. 2475, a bill proposing to increase efficiency and economy in the Federal Government by providing for training of Federal civilian officers and employees in the performance of official duties. The bill states that investigation and study by the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service of the House of Representatives has disclosed information and evidence that there presently exist serious and widespread deficiencies in the qualification and training of officers and employees of the United States at substantially all levels. Title I contains a three-point statement of congressional policy relating to a governmentwide program of training for Federal employees. H. R. 3484, the Government Employees Training Act, was introduced on February 2, 1955, by Congresswoman Katharine St. George. It proposes establishment throughout the Federal Government of (1) a program of in-service training for civilian employees thereof by, in, and through Government facilities, and (2) a program of out-service training for civilian employees conducted by, in, and through nonGovernment facilities. E. OTHER EDUCATIONAL AFFAIRS Several of the many other educational matters of congressional concern, not dealt with in this report, are the following: Further study of Federal activities in education.-One of the recommendations of the Special Subcommittee on Investigation of Federal Activities in Education, House of Representatives, 83d Congress, was that its inquiry into Federal activities in education be continued after the reorganization of the House in the 84th Congress. Enlargement of international educational exchange program.-The President's budget for 1956 requests $22 million for educational exchange activities-an increase of $4 million to enlarge the program. Education and juvenile-delinquency relationships.-The report on the National Conference on Juvenile Delinquency, held June 28-30, 1954, in Washington, D. C., says that— Since the schools get the children first and keep them longest, they are the Nation's first line of defense against this growing problem [of juvenile delinquency]. O |