Table 41.-Selected characteristics of statistical conferences and workshops under Title X (section 1009), by State: Fiscal year 1960

1 Information is available for only 26 of the 45 States and Territories receiving Federal Title X funds for fiscal year 1960.

The following did not participate: Alabama, Arizona, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, Canal Zone, Guam.

APPENDIX B

[For release at conclusion of news conference, January 12, 1961]

REPORT OF THE CONSULTANTS TO THE SECRETARY OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE AND THE U.S. COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION ON AREAS RELATED TO THE NATIONAL DEFENSE EDUCATION ACT OF 1958

(U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education, Washington, D.C.)

PANEL OF CONSULTANTS

James E. Allen, Jr., Commissioner of Education, State of New York.
Louis T. Benezet, president, the Colorado College.

*Arthur Bestor, professor of history, University of Illinois.

J. Douglas Brown, dean of the faculty, Princeton University.

James B. Conant, 588 Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y.

John E. Cosgrove, assistant director of education, American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations.

Willis E. Dugan, professor of educational psychology, University of Minnesota. J. W. Edgar, commissioner of education, State of Texas.

Lynn A. Emerson, 8907 Montgomery Avenue, Chevy Chase, Md.

Martin Essex, superintendent of schools, Akron (Ohio) Public Schools.

Marion B. Folsom, director, Eastman Kodak Co.

Alfred M. Gruenther, president, the American National Red Cross.

The Right Reverend Frederick G. Hochwalt, executive secretary, the National Catholic Educational Association.

Devereux C. Josephs, 51 Madison Avenue, New York, N.Y.

R. M. Lumiansky, dean of the graduate school and provost, Tulane University. Wheeler McMillen, vice president, Farm Journal, Inc.

Lorimer D. Milton, president, Citizens Trust Co., Atlanta, Ga.

Anne G. Pannell, president, Sweet Briar College.

A. L. Sachar, president, Brandeis University.

Ruth A. Stout, assistant secretary for professional relations, Kansas State Teachers Association.

E. W. Strong, vice chancellor, the University of California.

FOREWORD

We, the undersigned, while not unanimous in every particular, are in general agreement on the recommendations which follow. In a few instances, some of us have entered a dissenting opinion for the record, and in other instances changes have been suggested in the language of the recommendations. These are attached. It should be noted that there was no general agreement on the administrative procedures for handling a Federal scholarship program, but a majority agreed that a scholarship program is needed.

These recommendations deal with the National Defense Education Act of 1958, and are based on a series of discussions held in Washington, D.C., September 17, November 11, 12, 21, and 22, 1960. Abstracts of background material used in our discussions are available from the Office of Education, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.

*Professor Bestor has entered a minority report, which appears on p. 11.

Mr. McMillen regrets that because of the pressure of other duties he was able to attend only the first of the three meetings of the panel of consultants. He finds himself, furthermore, unable to concur fully with the recommendations of the group and therefore has not appended his name to the report.

559

The National Defense Education Act, within its present scope, has been effective in meeting certain needs. There remain, nonetheless, some further needs which require extension and revision of the act and fall in two areas: fulfillment of the Nation's manpower requirements and maintaining the quality of instruction. The needs in these areas are so urgent that certain extensions and revisions of the act should be made immediately.

As a nation, we are losing too much of the potential of our able youth because of underachievement, dropouts, uncorrected deficiencies and financial need; because of inadequate teaching staffs and facilities, weaknesses in curriculum, and the paucity of research in many areas affecting the learning process.

Basic to our consideration of the National Defense Education Act is our belief that the Federal Government has an obligation to help identify and bring to fruition the full potential of every youth. Further, it is our belief that failure to do this will imperil not only the individual, but the Nation and the free world. Our recommendations therefore are designed to strengthen guidance and counseling services, student financial assistance, staff, facilities, and curriculum, as well as to contribute further to an appropriate balance in fields of study. One of our major recommendations is to increase the supply of qualified teachers for all subjects at all levels-elementary, secondary, and higher education. But we must emphasize that these efforts to deal with specific issues will not adequately strengthen our total system of education unless our schools and colleges are provided with increased financial support from the Federal Government in addition to what is here proposed.

It is not within the scope of our assignment to delineate the exact methods by which this broader task shall be accomplished. Nevertheless, the time has now come, in our opinion, for the Federal Government to address itself to this problem. 1

1

We believe that any extensions of the act voted by the Congress should be for a period of 5 years.

We submit our recommendations for the consideration of the executive and legislative branches of the Federal Government.

(Signed) James E. Allen, Jr., Louis T. Benezet, J. Douglas Brown,
James B. Conant, John E. Cosgrove, Willis E. Dugan, J. W. Edgar.
Lynn A. Emerson, Martin Essex, Marion B. Folsom, Alfred M.
Gruenther, Frederick G. Hochwalt, Devereux C. Josephs, R. M.
Lumiansky, Lorimer D. Milton, Anne G. Pannell, A. L. Sachar,
Ruth A. Stout, E. W. Strong.

JANUARY 4, 1961.

MAJORITY REPORT-RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE NATIONAL
DEFENSE EDUCATION ACT OF 1958

TITLE II. STUDENT LOAN PROGRAM

The consultants recommend:

1. That the student loan program be continued, and that it be established on a revolving fund basis.

2. That the present $250,000 ceiling on the Federal capital contribution to a single institution be raised to $500,000.

3. That the program be extended to eligible full-time students in accredited public and private nonprofit 2-year post-high school technical institute programs. 4. That the disclaimer affidavit requirement of section 1001 (f) be eliminated. 5. That the present loan forgiveness feature for public elementary and secondary teachers be extended to all schools and college teachers.

6. That, upon the basis of an audit of administrative costs involved in this program, through a representative sampling of participating institutions, consideration be given to developing an equitable procedure for assisting institutions in defraying administrative costs involved in the program.

1 See separate statement by Monsignor Hochwalt, p. 14.

!

TITLE III. SCIENCE, MATHEMATICS, AND MODERN FOREIGN LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION

1. That programs dealing with science, mathematics, and modern foreign languages be continued at present levels of authorization.

2. That the provisions of this title be expanded to include English.

3. That the provisions of this title be expanded to include school library services and resources.

4. That the interest rate on loans to private schools be computed on an annual, rather than a monthly, basis.

5. That the loan funds not committed at the end of a designated period in each fiscal year be subject to reallocation for the same purpose at the discretion of the Commissioner of Education.

TITLE IV. GRADUATE FELLOWSHIPS

The consultants recommend:

1. That the present program be continued and expanded.

2. That additional fellowships be authorized for those institutions that can use them within existing capacity of established departments.

3. That the Commissioner of Education be authorized to appoint substitutes to fellowships vacated before the full term is used.

4. That a uniform payment to the institution of $2,500 per fellow per year accompany each fellowship.

5. That additional fellowships be authorized for a period of 1 year for college and university teachers who need to complete requirements for a doctoral degree.

6. That fellowships be provided for postdoctoral training.

7. That the graduate fellowship program be broadened and greatly expanded to include the granting of fellowships, of appropriate duration and character, to students planning to teach at the elementary and secondary school level.

TITLE V. GUIDANCE AND COUNSELING

The consultants recommend:

1. That title V be continued, and that present authorization of funds be increased for the existing programs under the title.

2. That title V be expanded to include the elementary school level, with particular emphasis on measures appropriate at that level for the early identification and development of talent.

3. That title V be expanded beyond the high school to include 2- and 4-year colleges and properly accredited nonprofit technical and vocational institutions. 4. That stipends under title V-B be extended to all eligible institute enrolees.

TITLE VI. LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT

The consultants recommend:

1. That the present program be continued.

2. That institutes be authorized for college teachers of modern foreign languages to advance their linguistic competence and their knowledge of new materials and methodology.

3. That the institute provisions of the title be expanded to include elementary and secondary teachers of English.

4. That stipends under title VI be extended to all eligible institute enrolees.

TITLE VII. NEW EDUCATIONAL MEDIA

The consultants recommend:

1. That the current programs be continued.

2. That the current rate of authorization be increased by $5 million to provide more support for demonstrations and related activities.

3. That the Federal Communications Commission be requested to continue to reserve television channels presently used for non-commercial broadcasting until further evidence is available as to the educational effectiveness of this medium.3

2 See additional statement by Mr. Strong. p. 14. See separate statement by Mr. Cosgrove, p. 14.